City Hall, Council Chambers Mayor Tom Gorman 401 S. … · 2016-09-27 · 401 S. Johnstone Avenue...

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

BARTLESVILLE CITY COUNCIL

Monday, April 18, 2016 at 7 p.m.

Mayor Tom Gorman

918-338-4282

City Hall, Council Chambers 401 S. Johnstone Avenue Bartlesville, OK 74003

AGENDA

1. Call to order the business meeting of the Bartlesville City Council by Mayor Gorman.

2. Roll Call and Establishment of a Quorum.

3. The invocation will be provided by Pastor JoAnn Thompson, God’s Gathering Place.

4. Citizens to be heard.

5. City Council Announcements and Proclamations. • Fair Housing Month - April 2016 • Flood Awareness Month - April 2016 • Arbor Day – April 23, 2016 • National Music Week - May 1-8, 2016

6. Authorities, Boards, Commissions and Committee Openings

• One opening on the Ambulance Commission • One opening on the Bartlesville Area History Museum • One opening on the Bartlesville Redevelopment Trust Authority • Two openings on the Sanitary Sewer Improvement Oversight Committee • One opening on the Tree Committee • Two opening on the White Rose Cemetery Board

7. Consent Docket

a. Approval of Minutes i. The Regular Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2016.

b. Appointment, Reappointments and Ratifications on Authorities, Boards, Commissions, and Committees. i. Reappointment of Mr. James Veit for an additional three year term on the Bartlesville Community

Center Trust Authority at the recommendation of Vice Mayor Copeland. c. Approval of Election to the OMAG Board of Trustees i. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the City of Bartlesville’s Ballot electing Mike Bailey and

Gina Snedeker to the OMAG Board of Trustees. d. Approval of Agreement i. Approval of a professional service contract with Tetra Tech, Inc. for the 2016 Wastewater

Collection System Rehabilitation Project (Phases 3 & 4). e. Receipt of Financials

i. Interim financials for the eight months ended February 29, 2016.

8. A public hearing to provide opportunity for public comment regarding a proposal for the creation of Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma. Presented by Jered Davidson, TIF Counsel.

9. Discuss and take action to approve an ordinance approving utilization of apportioned tax revenues authorized by statewide vote adopting Article 10, Section 6C of the Oklahoma Constitution and implemented by the Local Development Act, 62 O.S. §850, et seq; approving and adopting The Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project Plan and expressing intent to carry out the Project Plan; ratifying and confirming the actions, recommendations and findings of the Review Committee and the Bartlesville City Planning Commission; creating and establishing Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville; designating and adopting the increment district boundaries and the project area boundaries; adopting certain findings; reserving to the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, the authority to make minor amendments to the Project Plan; authorizing the City Council of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma to carry out and administer the Project Plan; establishing a Tax Apportionment Fund; authorizing directions for prospective apportionment of tax increments; establishing an allocation of use for tax increments; declaring apportionment funds to be funds of the City and limiting the pledge of apportioned increments to increments actually apportioned by the City; authorizing the City Council of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, or a public trust designated thereby, to implement the Project Plan utilizing apportioned tax increments to pay or reimburse project costs directly and/or to issue bonds or notes, if feasible and desirable, to pay project costs and to retire said bonds or notes from apportioned tax increments; providing for severability; declaring an emergency; and containing other provisions related thereto. Presented by Jered Davidson, TIF Counsel.

10. Discuss and take action on a review of an appeal filed by property owner Gregory M. Cantrell on a dilapidated structure at 232 NW Theodore, Bartlesville, Oklahoma, first heard by the City Council on September 8, 2015. Presented by Larry Silver, Supervisor, Neighborhood Services.

11. Discuss and take action on an appeal filed by property owner Ashley Doggett and potential buyer, Daniel Beltz, on a dilapidated structure located at 1515 SW Oak Avenue, Bartlesville, Oklahoma; action tabled on March 7, 2016 to be acted upon at next City Council Meeting. Presented by Larry Silver, Supervisor, Neighborhood Services.

12. Recess in order to move into the City Hall First Floor Conference Room to conduct a workshop session.

13. Reconvene the Special City Council Meeting.

14. Presentation and discussion on utility rates and the related Leidos utility rate study. Presented by Mike Bailey, Administrative Director/CFO.

15. City Manager and Staff Reports.

16. City Council Comments and Inquiries.

17. Adjournment. The Notice of Meeting and Agenda was received and filed in the Office of the City Clerk and posted in prominent public view at City Hall at 5 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2016.

/s/Elaine Banes Michael Bailey, City Clerk by Elaine Banes, Deputy City Clerk Administrative Director/CFO

All discussion items are subject to possible action by the City Council. Agenda items requiring a public hearing as required by law will be so noted. The City Council may at their discretion change the order of the business agenda items. City of Bartlesville encourages participation from all its citizens. If participation at any public meeting is not possible due to a disability, notification to the City Clerk at least one working day prior to the scheduled meeting is encouraged to make the necessary accommodations. The City may waive this rule if signing is not the necessary accommodation.

OOOffffffiiiccciiiaaalll PPPrrroooccclllaaammmaaatttiiiooonnn FFaaiirr HHoouussiinngg MMoonntthh

AApprriill 22001166

WHEREAS, April 7, 2016 will mark the 48th anniversary of the U.S. Fair Housing Law, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended which sought to eliminate discrimination in housing opportunities and to affirmatively further housing choices for all Americans; and WHEREAS, the ongoing struggle for dignity and housing opportunity for all is not the exclusive province of the Federal government; and WHEREAS, in 1996 the City Council of the City of Bartlesville adopted a Fair Housing Ordinance, solidifying the City’s commitment to the spirit of nondiscrimination; and WHEREAS, the City Council has further designated the Bartlesville Board of Adjustment as the Fair Housing Council and requests that any person or group of persons planning activities to promote fair housing to inform the Secretary of the Bartlesville Board of Adjustment of said activities; and WHEREAS, illegal barriers to equal opportunity in housing, no matter how subtle, diminish the rights of all. NOW THEREFORE, in the pursuit of the shared goal and responsibility of providing equal housing opportunities for all men and women, the Bartlesville City Council does hereby join in the national celebration by officially proclaiming April, 2016 as “Fair Housing Month” and encourages all agencies, institutions and individuals, public and private, in the City of Bartlesville to abide by the letter and spirit of the Fair Housing Law.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and caused the Official Seal of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, to be affixed this 18th day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand and sixteen.

__________________________

Ted Lockin, Ward 1

__________________________ John J. Kane, Ward 2

__________________________

Tom Gorman, Ward 3 and Mayor

___________________________ Dr. Joseph Callahan, Ward 4

___________________________

Dale Copeland, Ward 5 and Vice Mayor

Official Proclamation

“FLOOD AWARENESS MONTH-APRIL 2016” WHEREAS, flooding causes more than $2 billion in property damage and numerous deaths each year in the United States, including many Oklahomans who lose their lives by driving into dangerous floodwaters; and WHEREAS, for their own benefit, the citizens of Bartlesville must be constantly reminded of the various flood safety procedures required to protect their lives and livelihoods; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Bartlesville should be made aware of the importance of mitigating flood hazards; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Bartlesville must assure that their activities in the floodplain will create no adverse impacts on their neighbors or the community; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Bartlesville should be made aware of the natural functions of floodplains and the need for floodplain preservation and restoration. NOW, THEREFORE, the Bartlesville City Council does hereby officially proclaim the month of April as “Flood Awareness Month” in the City of Bartlesville. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, to be affixed to this Proclamation declared on the 18th day of April, 2016. ______________________________________

Ted Lockin, Ward 1

_________________________________________ John J. Kane, Ward 2

________________________________________ Tom Gorman, Ward 3 and Mayor

___________________________ ___ Joseph Callahan, Ph.D., Ward 4

________________________________________ Dale Copeland, Ward 5 and Vice Mayor

OOOffffffiiiccciiiaaalll PPPrrroooccclllaaammmaaatttiiiooonnn

AAArrrbbbooorrr DDDaaayyy AAAppprrriiilll 222333,,, 222000111666

Whereas, in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of tree; and Whereas, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska; and Whereas, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife; and Whereas, trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community; and Whereas, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal; and Whereas, Bartlesville has been recognized as a Tree City USA by the National Arbor Day Foundation and desires to continue its tree-planting practices. Therefore, The City Council of the City of Bartlesville, do hereby proclaim April 23, 2016 as Arbor Day in the City of Bartlesville and urge all citizens to support efforts to protect trees and woodlands and to support our city’s urban forestry program. Further, we urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the hearts and promote the well being of present and future generations.


__________________________

Ted Lockin, Ward 1

__________________________ John J. Kane, Ward 2

__________________________



__________________________


OOOffffffiiiccciiiaaalll PPPrrroooccclllaaammmaaatttiiiooonnn

NNaattiioonnaall MMuussiicc WWeeeekk MMaayy 11-- MMaayy 88,, 22001166

WHEREAS, music play an invaluable role in our community, both culturally and economically; and WHEREAS, music is the language of all people and one of the greatest forces in creating peace and harmony in the world; and WHEREAS, the Musical Research Society has worked to foster music education and performance in the Bartlesville area for over 100 years; and WHEREAS, the National Federation of Music Clubs and its cooperating organizations are dedicated to encouraging young musicians, increasing musical knowledge, advancing American music, and directing attention to the dynamic influence of music in everyday living. NOW THEREFORE, the Bartlesville City Council does hereby proclaim the week of May 1 – 8, 2016 to be National Music Week in the City of Bartlesville and ask that all citizens of this community observe and take part in activities, recognizing the importance of music, musicians, and musical organizations to the cultural life of our City, State, Nation and World..


__________________________

Ted Lockin, Ward 1

__________________________ John J. Kane, Ward 2

__________________________



___________________________


1

BARTLESVILLE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

Monday, April 4, 2016

City Hall, Council Chambers 401 S. Johnstone Avenue

Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74003

(Notice of this meeting was posted on Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.) ______________________________________________________________________________________________

City Council Members Present: Mayor Tom Gorman, Vice Mayor Dale Copeland, Ted Lockin, and Dr. Joseph Callahan City Council Members Absent: John J. Kane City Staff Present: Ed Gordon, City Manager, Jerry Maddux, City Attorney, Mike

Bailey, Administrative Director/CFO; Terry Lauritsen, Director of Water Utilities; Lisa Beeman, Director of Community Development; Shellie McGill, Director of Human Resources and Interim Library Director; Nancy Warring, Grants Administrator; Micah Siemers, Director of Engineering; Kelli Williams, Chief Communications Officer; Jody Shahan, Golf Course Superintendent; Det. Jim Warring; Lt. Kevin Ickleberry; and Elaine Banes, Executive Assistant.

1. The Bartlesville City Council meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. by Mayor Gorman. 2. Roll Call and establishment of a quorum. Roll call was conducted and a quorum was established. 3. Citizens to Be Heard. There were no citizens to be herd. 4. City Council Announcements and Proclamations

• Mayor Gorman read the Civitan Month – April 2016 Proclamation and recognized the Civitans who were in attendance.

• Vice Mayor Copeland read the Toastmasters Month – April 2016 Proclamation and recognized the Toastmaster members who were in attendance.

• Mr. Lockin read the Public Safety TeleCommunications E911 Professionals Week – April 11-15. 2016 Proclamation and recognized Lt. Kevin Ickleberry who is the supervisor for the dispatchers.

5. Authorities, Boards, Commissions and Committees

• One opening on the Ambulance Commission • One opening on the Bartlesville Area History Museum • One opening on the City Planning Commission • One opening on the Bartlesville Redevelopment Trust Authority • Two openings on the Sanitary Sewer Improvement Oversight Committee • One opening on the Tree Committee

2

The Mayor announced these openings and encouraged citizens to obtain an application from the City’s website or from the City Manager’s office.

6. Consent Docket

a. Approval of Minutes

i. The Regular Meeting Minutes of March 7, 2016.

b. Appointments, Reappointments and Ratifications to Authorities, Boards, Commissions and Committees.

i. Appointment of Councilman Callahan to serve as a voting member on the History Museum Trust Authority and the Street and Traffic Committee.

ii. Reappointment of Mr. Joe Todd and Ms. Linda Hobbs to additional three-year terms on the White Rose Cemetery Board at the recommendation of Mayor Gorman.

c. Approval of Contracts and Agreements

i. Between the City of Bartlesville and Kleinfelder to provide construction observation and testing services for the City of Bartlesville Public Safety Complex in the amount of $19,700.

ii. Between the City of Bartlesville and Wilbert Memorials for the resetting/leveling/straightening of several large stones in White Rose Cemetery in an amount of approximately $4,930.00.

iii. Second Amendment to Tower/Ground Lease Agreement between the City of Bartlesville and New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC for Cell Site Number TU0137, Cell Site Name SE WT Bartlesville, referred to as South Tank.

d. Approval of Resolution i. A resolution approving participation with the State of Oklahoma Department of

Transportation in a traffic signal project. e. Receipt of Financials i. Interim financials for the seven months ended January 31, 2016. f. Receipt o f Bids i. Bid No. 2015-2016-020 for a Fairway Mower for Adams Golf Course. Mayor Gorman read the consent docket. Vice Mayor Copeland moved to approve the consent docket as presented, seconded by Mr.

Lockin. Voting Aye: Dr. Callahan, Mr. Lockin, Vice Mayor Copeland, Mayor Gorman Voting Nay: None Motion: Passed 7. Discuss and take action to award Bid No. 2015-2016-020 for a Fairway Mower for Adams

Golf Course. Presented by Vice Mayor Copeland. Vice Mayor Copeland moved to award Bid No. 2015-2016-020 to P & K Equipment for a 7700a

John Deere Fairway Mower in the amount of $44,557 including the canopy, seconded by Dr. Callahan.

3

Voting Aye: Mr. Lockin, Vice Mayor Copeland, Dr. Callahan, Mayor Gorman. Voting Nay: None Motion: Passed 8. Discuss and take action to receive a resolution adopting the recommendations and

findings of the Tax Incentive District Review Committee in regard to the formation of Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma. Presented by Nate Ellis, TIF Counsel.

Mr. Jared Davidson, Public Finance Law Group, spoke for Mr. Ellis. He presented the Tax

Incentive District Review Committee Resolution which states that the Review Committee found that the boundaries of the proposed Increment District are within a reinvestment area and meets the requirements of Section 856(B)(4)(a)(3) of the Local Development Act. The resolution states the Tax Incentive Review Committee’s recommendation to the City Council in regard to the Project Plan, which can be found attached to these minutes.

Mr. Lockin moved to receive the resolution as presented, seconded by Vice Mayor Copeland. Voting Aye: Vice Mayor Copeland, Dr. Callahan, Mr. Lockin, Mayor Gorman. Voting Nay: None Motion: Passed 9. A public hearing to provide information and answer questions regarding a proposal for

the creation of Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma. Presented by Nate Ellis, TIF Counsel.

Mr. Jered Davison was present on behalf of Mr. Ellis. He reported that this public hearing is the

first two required public hearings in order to create a tax increment financing district. He reported that he had been in conversations with City and BDA staff for about a year. The first step towards creating the district and project plan was a resolution of support passed by the City Council in March to authorize the Tax Incentive District Review Committee to move forward with the study. Under Councilman Lockin’s chairmanship, the Review Committee met several times to research the project. Mr. Davidson continued saying the Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project Plan describes a mixed use development that contemplates construction on a site of approximately 115 acres of over 200,000 square feet of new retail shopping centers (upon full build-out) and a $20 million high-quality market rate multi-family residential complex of 200 dwelling units. The development will occur in as many as four phases totaling approximately $63 million. Ad valorem will offset site improvements, drainage and various public improvements that may be required. Once approved, Phase I will begin very shortly then subsequent phases would be presented to the City Council at the appropriate times. The complete project plan is available at City Hall. Mr. Davidson concluded saying that following the second public hearing on April 18, he will have an action item for approval of the formation of TIF No. 10.

The Mayor opened the public hearing at 7:33 p.m. Appearing to speak was Chris Sweet who

lives in Woodland. He stated that he had been unable to locate much information about the project plan and TIF districts. Mayor Gorman responded that an extensive presentation had been provided to the Tax Increment Review Committee prior to this meeting and that the document is available to the public. Ms. Beeman added that the information is on the City’s website and copies can be obtained at City Hall.

There being no on further appear to speak, the Mayor closed the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. 10. A public hearing to consider and take action on Case No. PC-15-13-TZ/PUD/SDP an

4

application from David Wood on behalf of the Bartlesville Development Authority for approval of a Rezoning from RA and RS-10 (Agricultural and Single Family Residential) to C-5/PUD and RM-1.5/PUD (General Commercial and Multi-Family Residential) and a Supplemental Designation Planned Unit Development of approximately 115 acres, and Site Development Plan approval of a 12.6 acre tract located within this 115 acre tract located at the southeast corner of Adams Boulevard and Silver Lake Road, legally described as a tract of land in the Northwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East of the Indian Meridian, Bartlesville, Washington County, Oklahoma. Presented by Lisa Beeman, Director of Community Development.

Ms. Beeman reported that the applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning of a 115-acre site

along with a supplemental designation PUD to permit a mixed-use development on the site. The 115-acre planned unit development will consist of retail land uses and multi-family residential land uses with public open space. Development will occur in four phases as dictated by market demand. The proposed development will occur in four phases with Phase 1 being a retail shopping center on approximately 13 acres located directly east of the existing Lowe’s store on the south side of Adams Boulevard. Because this is the first phase of the development, the applicant is also requesting approval of the site development plan for this retail shopping center. Ms. Beeman continued reporting on the proposed land uses; prohibited uses; the details of the multi-family residential tract; stormwater detention and floodplain development information; wetland information; public utilities, access, traffic and street improvements. She included a report on signage and the residential protection screening requirements. Additionally she covered the Site Development Plan Information setting out the proposed development; general development requirements; parking; landscaping; drainage, on-site detention, compensatory storage; and site lighting. She added that the required citizen participation meeting was held on March 10, 2016 to present the proposed plan with 19 people attending.

Ms. Beeman provided staff comments covering development within a floodplain; the

development of Lee Lake and park land lying north of Adams Blvd.; the development of Lowe’s in which it and the proposed retail development is in response to citizen’s call for enhanced retail shopping opportunities. She added that the multifamily housing development is also in response to an unmet housing demand for high-quality market rate apartment. This land use will comprise less than 30% of the total land for the master development plan for the site with the remaining 70% to remain in its natural state or be developed as a series of open space amenities for public use. Staff recommendations were reported to the City Planning Commission (CPC) and at their meeting on March 22, 2016, the CPC approved the following recommendations to the City Council by a 6-0 vote: *Recommend approval of the rezoning and PUD master development plan for the 115-acre site as requested with the following condition: 1) If any of the proposed open space amenities located within this 115-acre site are to become part of the City’s park and recreation system to be owned and maintained by the city of Bartlesville, a development plan identifying specific uses and locations as well as the design of said amenities shall be prepared in conjunction with the City of Bartlesville staff, reviewed by the Bartlesville Park Board with recommendations to the City Council for final approval prior to the development of any such space; and * Recommend approval of the proposed site development plan for Phase 1 of the development as requested with the following modifications: 1) the exterior yard setback along the north property line adjacent to Adams Boulevard and along the east property line adjacent to the new roadway be reduced from 50-feet and 25-feet respectively to 20-feet; and 2) approval of a maximum 35-foot light pole with a light fixture that provides a zero-footcandle reading at the property line.

Ms. Beeman concluded her report requesting that the City Council approve the ordinance as

presented with the conditions set forth by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Lockin stated his appreciation for a very illustrative and informative presentation.

5

Mayor Gorman provided information regarding statistics over the past year of good professional job growth, but a minimal population growth due to many choosing to work in Bartlesville but live elsewhere, and that the Bartlesville Development Authority (BDA) was formed to work towards attracting citizens to live here as well as work here. He added that the proposed plan is an excellent culmination of the BDA doing their job and that as soon as the initial stages are approved, the developers will be able to move forward with the construction stage and will be able to let the City know the businesses that will be locating there. He continued stating that Bartlesville has this wonderful green space in the middle of town that happens to lie in a floodplain, and that Lowe’s built in this location at the City’s standard of 1’ above floodplain and has found the location to be successful. He apologized for any misunderstanding between the City and citizens regarding the buffer zone further explaining the situation. Ms. Beeman clarified that it was her recommendation to the City Planning Commission to keep the 100 foot buffer zone, but the CPC denied that recommendation. The Mayor continued by saying that everyone is aware the development abuts a residential neighborhood, that the developer is required to have a screen, and that it was his desire that all parties work together and enhance the screening to more than a wood fence.

The Mayor opened the public hearing at 8:09 p.m. Appearing to speak were:

1) Jack Woods who was concerned about building in a floodplain and the impact it may have on other neighborhoods asking the City Council to vote no;

2) Mark Allen shared his concerns that there seemed to be conflicting information provided at the City Planning Commission meeting regarding the dirt work and the knowledge of what businesses would be located in the development;

3) Steve Smith shared his concerns on how the development will impact his neighborhood to

the east such as the flood zone, the view; property values and mentioned the incorrect phone number listed on the required yellow sign to obtain information;

4) Chris Sweet who shared the same concerns as Mr. Smith added that he had contacted the

EPA and found that the Army Corps of Engineers had not provided a permit for the development and that he was against having the development in this area;

5) Max Lutke shared that he was in favor of the development how other new ideas had been

negatively received but are now successful, and that he feels it will be beneficial in connecting the east with the west. He added that it will bring in additional taxes and growth, and that he personally felt it would improve property values and encouraged the City Council to vote yes.

6) Martin Garber shared his support for the development and that he had been part of a study

group who worked many years to attract housing, retail and other amenities to Bartlesville. He added that the project has been studied significantly, that three hearings had already been held, that the media had reported on it and that all the information is available to the public for review. He added that he is willing to overlook more traffic and lights as it will attract growth and taxes. He encouraged the Council to vote yes.

7) Dennis Halpin appeared on behalf of the Chamber and as a recent member of the City

Planning Commission and commended the BDA and CPC volunteers for the work involved in bringing this proposed development forward to the City Council. He added that the developer is to be commended as well for staying with the plan no matter the obstacles the location presented. He added his support of the development.

6

8) Don Martin shared that the proposed development would abut his property and he was concerned about the open woods and wildlife, and asked for additional time to consider the plan. He added his concern about it being rezoned and being against a pig farm at this site.

9) Virginia DeFries shared her concern about flooding in this area, recalling the 1986 flood and

the damage that was done to nearby neighborhoods. She added that she was aware of the benefits of the development but wanted the developer to be aware of flooding and the impact developing this area could have on neighborhoods.

10) Zach Heidon commented that he lived on top of a hill and would not be impacted by flooding

and commended the staff, as well as his councilman, Ted Lockin for being available for discussion about the development. He shared his concern about the whether the beautifully depicted detention pond may really be empty and a large brown hole. He inquired of Ms. Beeman who said additional funds could be necessary to develop the water feature. Mr. Heidon then asked the City Council to reinstate Ms. Beeman’s recommendation to re-insert her recommendation that the buffer area be a minimum of 100-feet in width on the east and south property lines where the site abuts the single-family residential district. He then asked the City Council to continue action for two weeks to work with development engineers to find a middle ground to being the community together.

There being no one further appear to speak, the Mayor closed the public hearing at 8:46 p.m. Mayor Gorman stated his appreciation for the stated concerns and added his strong faith in the

City’s floodplain engineer, planners, city attorney and city manager who will all enforce the floodplain regulations. The concerns about the names of the businesses coming into the development will have to wait until the developer has the initial approval to move forward. The questions regarding off-site dirt, he stated was not financially feasible for Phase 1, but would be required as the project moves into Phases 2, 3 and 4. He addressed the Corps of Engineer permitting which will be completed if appropriate and at the appropriate time. The Mayor also stated that all parties will be considerate to the residents to the east of the development and will work to keep the character of the Woodland community preserved.

Mr. Lockin inquired about a PSO easement that he and his constituent, Mr. Allen, discussed

recently due to PSO taking a tree down. Ms. Beeman stated that she was unaware of a PSO easement at the location he was speaking of. Mr. Allen made comments from the audience that were inaudible.

Vice Mayor Copeland clarified the concern of Mr. Martin saying that the current zoning would

allow a pig farm, but the recommended rezoning would not allow such a farm on this site. He added that many have a fear of the unknown and affirmed that all the answers were unknown at this time to every question. Any development or project that abuts a residential neighborhood is difficult, but the Angilou Study stated hands down that Bartlesville needs a retail center. He concurred with the Mayor that the staff and developer need to work out a suitable solution for the required buffer. He concluded that he lives in the Walmart neighborhood and had been forced to adjust to a development with an impact to his life as well.

Dr. Callahan stated his appreciation to everyone who came and provided their comments and

concerns. It was his opinion that many studies had been made on this issue, so the City should stand ready to approve or else why buy those studies.

Mr. Lockin commented that the developer has prepared about four iterations of the proposal in

order to consider all aspects of the location which has cost a great deal of money. Many have worked hard to make this happen and he stated his support of the project. He added that he felt that the staff will work very hard to minimize the impact on the Woodland neighborhood.

7

Mr. Maddux requested that the Council take two actions, one for the rezoning and PUD, and

one for the Site Development Plan. Vice Mayor Copeland moved to approve the rezoning and PUD Master Development Plan,

seconded by Dr. Callahan. Voting Aye: Dr. Callahan, Mr. Lockin, Vice Mayor Copeland, Mayor Gorman Voting Nay: None Motion: Passed. Mayor Gorman moved to approve the Site Development Plan as recommended by the City

Planning Commission with the addition of directing the staff and developer to work together to make sure edge treatment is done in a considerate fashion, and for the minimal excavation, seconded by Vice Mayor Copeland.

Voting Aye: Dr. Callahan, Mr. Lockin, Vice Mayor Copeland, Mayor Gorman Voting Nay: None Motion: Passed.

The Mayor called a recess at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:15 p.m. 11. Discuss and take action to approve the City of Bartlesville’s FY 2015 Audit. Presented by

Debbie Mueggenborg, CPA, Stotts, Archambo, Mueggenborg and Barclay. Ms. Mueggenborg reported a clean audit and was very pleased with the overall result. She

reviewed the audit and a brief discussion was held on the value of the tax increment financing districts. Mr. Gordon thanked Ms. Mueggenborg for her and her staff’s communication and appreciated Mike Bailey, Jason Muninger and Alicia Shelton for working to clear up the deficiencies from last year.

Vice Mayor Copeland moved to approve the City of Bartlesville’s FY 2015 Audit, seconded by

Mr. Lockin. Voting Aye: Mr. Lockin, Vice Mayor Copeland, Dr. Callahan, Mayor Gorman Voting Nay: None Motion: Passed. 12. New Business

There was no new business

13. City Manager and Staff Reports Mr. Gordon reported: Spring Clean Up is the week of April 16-23 and provided details of the event; and Operation Clean House is Saturday, April 23 and provided details of the event; and New adult exercise equipment has been installed at Johnstone Park and an event held last

Friday resulted in Lisa Beeman climbing the rope 14. City Council Comments and Inquiries.

8

Dr. Callahan reported a good attendance at the grand opening of the adult exercise equipment

at Johnstone Park. Vice Mayor Copeland commented that it was good to see such a good turnout at the meeting

tonight, adding that citizen’s input and participation is recognized and respected. Vice Mayor Copeland also reported his attendance at the Boy Scout Annual Recognition

Banquet recently where those achieving Eagle Rank were recognized. He stated that the honorees were recognized for many years of dedication and work towards this goal.

Mayor Gorman commented on how Bartlesville has taken another step forward towards retail

development. He added that at times, the City Council is privileged to make difficult decisions that will benefit the good of the whole community.

15. Adjournment. There being no further business to conduct, Mayor Gorman adjourned the meeting 9:26 p.m. Mayor Tom Gorman Mike Bailey, Administrative Director/CFO

ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE

MEMORANDUM

TO: Ed Gordon, City Manager FROM: Mike Bailey, Administrative Director/CFO SUBJECT: City of Bartlesville’s ballot for OMAG Trustees. GENERAL INFORMATION: The City of Bartlesville is a member of the Oklahoma Municipal Assurance Group (OMAG), which is a non-profit, risk sharing pool for Oklahoma municipalities formed as an inter-local trust that provides our liability and property insurances. The governing body of OMAG is comprised of 7 trustees who are elected from OMAG’s members. Trustees can be elected or appointed officials of the member municipality. I am up for election for my fourth term but the other incumbent board member is retiring. It would be my recommendation that Council vote to elect Mike Bailey, City of Bartlesville and Gina Snedeker, Finance Director, City of Chickasha for these two positions. Please schedule this item for the Consent Docket of the next City Council Meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Vote to elect Mike Bailey and Gina Snedeker to the OMAG Board of Trustees.

TO: Members of the Oklahoma Municipal Assurance Group

FROM: Jon Woods, Chief Executive Officer

DATE: March 30, 2016

SUBJECT: Election of Two Trustees

Herein is the OFFICIAL BALLOT for the governing body of your municipality to use in electing

two (2) members to the Board of Trustees of the Oklahoma Municipal Assurance Group for three-

year terms commencing July 1, 2016.

Trustees whose terms expire on June 30, 2016 are:

Mr. Michael Bailey, Administrative Director/CFO of the City of Bartlesville

Mr. John Sheppard, City Manager of the City of Walters

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE FAILURE TO PROPERLY SUBMIT THIS BALLOT

WILL INVALIDATE THE BALLOT!

Your Ballot must be:

(1) Signed by the Mayor;

(2) Attested by the City Clerk; and

(3) Received by OMAG no later than May 31, 2016, by:

(a) sending a facsimile of the ballot to OMAG at (405) 657-1401;

(b) sending the ballot to Kelsie Adams at [email protected]; or

(c) sending OMAG the ballot by certified mail.

mailto:[email protected]

BALLOT

OKLAHOMA MUNICIPAL ASSURANCE GROUP

2016 Election of Two Trustees

The biographical sketch for each nominee was written by the person(s) who made the nomination.

Nominees are listed in alphabetical order. YOU MAY VOTE FOR TWO (2) NOMINEES.

____ MICHAEL BAILEY, Administrative Director/CFO, City of Bartlesville. Michael holds a

Bachelor’s Degree in Accounting and is a licensed CPA. Michael is the Administrative

Director/CFO for the City of Bartlesville. Michael has served on the OMAG Board of Trustees

since 2007 and has held the positions of Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Secretary. Michael serves

on many other municipal Boards. (The City of Bartlesville participates in the Municipal

Liability Protection Plan and the Municipal Property Protection Plan.)

____ DAN GALLOWAY, City Manager, City of El Reno. Dan has a BS in Geography and

Economics at Western Illinois University and MS in Urban Planning/Economic Geography at

Southern Illinois University. Past service as City Manager includes Owasso, Clinton, Bethany,

Stillwater and currently El Reno, Oklahoma. He was previously a seven year OMAG Board

member. (The City of El Reno participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan and the

Municipal Property Protection Plan.)

____ VERNON HOEHN, Council Member, City of Fairview. Vernon was raised in Oklahoma and

attended college at UCO receiving a BS Degree. Actively involved in community organizations

and interests. Served on council for 12 years, holding Mayor and Vice-Mayor positions during his

term. Active member of Chamber, President of MCEDA, and NW Water Action Committee.

Retired Military. (The City of Fairview participates in the Municipal Liability Protection

Plan, the Municipal Property Protection Plan, and the Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

____ ROGER KOLMAN, City Manager, City of Glenpool. Roger Kolman has served as the City

Manager of Glenpool since 2014, and previously served as the City Manager in Anadarko, OK and

as the Interim and Assistant City Manager in Maricopa, AZ. Roger earned a Master of

Administration and Bachelor of Science in Business and is a licensed CPA. (The City of Glenpool

participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan, the Municipal Property Protection

Plan, and the Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

____ MARK SKILES, City Manager, City of Clinton. Mark is the current City Manager for the City

of Clinton. He has 13+ years’ experience in municipal government serving communities in

Oklahoma and Kansas. Mark holds a Bachelor’s in Agriculture and a Master’s in Administrative

Studies. He is experienced in serving on community boards. (The City of Clinton participates in

the Municipal Liability Protection Plan, the Municipal Property Protection Plan, and the

Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

____ CLAYTON E. LUCAS, II, City Manager, City of Sallisaw. Clayton Lucas has been employed

by cities in California, Utah and Missouri before returning to his hometown of Sallisaw. Clayton

holds a B.A. in Urban Planning from Fresno State and an M.P.A. from Pennsylvania State

University. He’s a sixth generation native of Oklahoma and is married with 5 children. (The City

of Sallisaw participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan and the Workers’

Compensation Plan.)

____ DEA MANDEVILL, City Manager, City of Medford. Dea has 28 years of municipal experience

and holds a Bachelor’s in Business. She serves on the Oklahoma Hall of Fame Board and is

Treasurer for the Medford Lions Club and St. Mary’s Altar Society. She’s the Past President of the

Oklahoma City Manager’s Association and Medford Chamber of Commerce. (The City of

Medford participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan and the Workers’

Compensation Plan.)

____ JOHN NOBLITT, City Manager, City of Lindsay. Mr. Noblitt has over 20 years of experience

leading, managing and participating in comprehensive planning and policy programs in both the

public and private sectors. Mr. Noblitt holds BBA from Letourneau University and is a Certified

Public Manager. (The City of Lindsay participates in the Municipal Liability Protection

Plan, the Municipal Property Protection Plan and the Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

SEE REVERSE FOR ADDITIONAL NOMINEES

SEE REVERSE FOR ADDITIONAL NOMINEES

____ MIKE NUNNELEY, Town Administrator, Town of Mannford. Mike Nunneley, 2015’s City

Manager of the Year, and Mannford Administrator began his municipal service as Mayor of Granite

in 1996 and served as Granite’s first Town Administrator. Mike has made over 65 presentations

statewide to city councils on how to hire city managers, on municipal operations and economic

development. (The Town of Mannford participates in the Municipal Liability Protection

Plan, the Municipal Property Protection Plan, and the Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

____ MARY RUPP, City Manager, City of Perry. Mary Rupp, A Don Rider Award recipient, was

appointed Perry City Manager in 2012 after a 35 year career with the City of Stillwater. As

Stillwater’s Deputy City Manager Mary gained administrative, risk management and insurance

experience. Mary was the first Deputy CM to serve as President of the CMAO. (The City of

Perry participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan, the Municipal Property

Protection Plan and the Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

____ JANET SMITH, City Manager, City of Crescent. Janet gained experience working in Edmond

and Ponca City management before becoming City Manager for Crescent. She has earned a

Master’s Degree in Public Administration, is a member of CMAO and is a Board member for the

522 Crescent Ambulance District and Logan County Economic Development Authority. (The City

of Crescent participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan and the Municipal

Property Protection Plan.)

____ GINA SNEDEKER, Finance Director, City of Chickasha. Twenty-nine years of municipal

experience. Certified in public finance and as a municipal clerk. Holds current position as State

Representative for GFOA of OK. Named “City Clerk of 2014” by ASCOG a Trust Authority for

Grady Co. and “OMCTFOA Member of Year” in 2014 from OML. (The City of Chickasha

participates in the Municipal Liability Protection Plan, the Municipal Property Protection

Plan, and the Workers’ Compensation Plan.)

SIGN AND ATTEST

Ballot cast for the governing body of the municipality of __________________________________

Signed: ___________________________________

Mayor

Attested: __________________________________ Date: ______________________, 2016

Clerk

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE FAILURE TO PROPERLY SUBMIT THIS BALLOT

WILL INVALIDATE THE BALLOT!

Your Ballot must be received by the Oklahoma Municipal Assurance Group, 3650 S.

Boulevard, Edmond, OK 73013 no later than May 31, 2016, by:

(1) sending a facsimile of the ballot to OMAG at (405) 657-1401;

(2) sending the ballot to Kelsie Adams at [email protected]; or

(3) sending OMAG the ballot by certified mail.


The City of Bartlesville – 401 South Johnstone Avenue – Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74003 phone: 918-338-4116; fax: 918-338-4109; net: www.cityofbartlesville.org

DATE: April 12, 2016 TO: Ed Gordon, City Manager FROM: Terry Lauritsen, P.E., Director of Water Utilities SUBJECT: Professional Service Contract with Tetra Tech, Inc. for the 2016

Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation project (Phases 3 & 4)

In 2014 staff completed a Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Survey (SSES) that quantified areas of high storm water infiltration into the City’s wastewater collection system. This study, which was mandated through an Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality’s (ODEQ) consent order, recommended collection system improvements to reduce storm water infiltration and inflow and mapped out a four phase approach to correct these deficiencies. Phases 1 & 2 are currently under construction, and design services are needed to prepare construction documents for the remaining phases (3 & 4). Given Tetra Tech’s expertise and experience with the City’s collection and treatment system (they have served as the City’s sewer program manager since the early 90’s and have been involved with the hydraulic study, SSES and previous phases of the collection system improvements), staff requested a proposal and scope of services to perform the necessary design services for 3 & 4 required by the Consent Order. The professional services contract, which is attached, will complete the needed design services for Phase 3 by June 30, 2016 and Phase 4 by September 1, 2016 (shown on the next page is the location of the rehab areas). The cost for these professional services is $150,000 and is within the available budget allocated for the project ($1.3MM). Staff recommends approval of the professional service contract with Tetra Tech for the 2016 Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation project. Please schedule this item for Council consideration at its April 18th meeting.

The City of Bartlesville – 401 South Johnstone Avenue – Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74003 phone: 918-338-4116; fax: 918-338-4109; net: www.cityofbartlesville.org

Mike Bailey Alicia SheltonAdministrative Director/CFO Accountant

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 4

REPORT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES ANDCHANGES IN FUND BALANCES

For The Eight Months Ended February 29, 2016

CITY COUNCIL

Tom Gorman, MayorWard 3

Dale Copeland, Vice MayorWard 5

Ted Lockin John Kane Joseph Callahan

City ManagerEd Gordon

Prepared by:

Jason MuningerInternal Services Supervisor

TABLE OF CONTENTS

HIGHLIGHTS

MAJOR FUNDS:GENERAL FUNDWASTEWATER OPERATING/BMA WASTEWATER FUNDSWATER OPERATING/BMA WATER FUNDSSANITATION

OTHER FUNDS:REVENUE BUDGET STATUSEXPENDITURE BUDGET STATUSCHANGE IN FUND BALANCE

EXPLANATORY MEMO

FINANCIAL STATEMENT REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS(Dashed line represents average percent of year for 4 preceding fiscal years)

47.5%

48.0%

48.5%

49.0%

49.5%

50.0%

50.5%

5,500,000 5,600,000 5,700,000 5,800,000 5,900,000 6,000,000 6,100,000 6,200,000 6,300,000 6,400,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

GENERAL FUND SALES TAX

YTD

% OF YR

49.0%

50.0%

51.0%

52.0%

53.0%

54.0%

55.0%

56.0%

1,850,000 1,900,000 1,950,000 2,000,000 2,050,000 2,100,000 2,150,000 2,200,000 2,250,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

WASTEWATER FEES

YTD

% OF YR

50.0%

52.0%

54.0%

56.0%

58.0%

60.0%

62.0%

-

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

WATER FEES

YTD

% OF YR

47.5%

48.0%

48.5%

49.0%

49.5%

50.0%

50.5%

51.0%

2,150,000 2,160,000 2,170,000 2,180,000 2,190,000 2,200,000 2,210,000 2,220,000 2,230,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

SANITATION FEES

YTD

% OF YR

Total Budget YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Encum YTD Total % of

Budget YTD Total % Total

Year

Revenue:Sales Tax 12,436,269$ 8,290,846$ 8,269,300$ -$ 8,269,300$ 66.5% 8,491,145$ 68.0%Gross Receipt Tax 1,580,488 1,053,659 981,020 - 981,020 62.1% 1,038,250 67.6%Licenses and Permits 211,700 141,133 188,927 - 188,927 89.2% 155,990 80.6%Intergovernmental 624,650 416,433 433,045 - 433,045 69.3% 436,856 66.2%Charges for Services 385,700 257,133 245,712 - 245,712 63.7% 249,896 66.5%Court Costs 180,600 120,400 93,358 - 93,358 51.7% 120,719 67.7%Police/Traffic Fines 563,800 375,867 303,248 - 303,248 53.8% 358,034 67.7%Parking Fines 101,000 67,333 71,425 - 71,425 70.7% 59,590 64.4%Other Fines 35,200 23,467 26,482 - 26,482 75.2% 26,409 65.5%Investment Income - - 21,555 - 21,555 N.A. 12,332 43.9%Miscellaneous Income 174,900 116,600 188,571 (5) 188,566 107.8% 213,842 55.2%Transfers In 3,267,436 2,178,291 2,178,292 - 2,178,292 66.7% 2,130,840 66.7%

Total 19,561,743$ 13,041,162$ 13,000,935$ (5)$ 13,000,930$ 66.5% 13,293,903$ 67.5%

Expenditures:General Government 5,562,560$ 3,708,373$ 3,563,822$ 317,197$ 3,881,019$ 69.8% 3,748,791$ 71.4%Public Safety 10,078,104 6,718,736 6,493,379 65,385 6,558,764 65.1% 6,553,676 66.5%Street 1,186,512 791,008 838,778 (107,036) 731,742 61.7% 741,707 70.9%Culture and Recreation 2,093,044 1,395,363 1,319,136 11,494 1,330,630 63.6% 1,353,395 67.3%Transfers Out 1,112,658 741,772 741,778 - 741,778 66.7% 789,112 66.7%Reserves 792,580 528,387 - - - 0.0% - N.A.

Total 20,825,458$ 13,883,639$ 12,956,893$ 287,040$ 13,243,933$ 63.6% 13,186,681$ 68.2%

Changes in Fund Balance:

Fund Balance 7/1 2,015,823$

Net Revenue (Expense) 44,042

Ending Fund Balance 2,059,865$

67% of Year Lapsed

2015-16 Fiscal Year 2014-15 Fiscal Year

GENERAL FUNDStatement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances



Year

Revenue:Wastewater Fees 4,033,100$ 2,688,733$ 2,855,556$ -$ 2,855,556$ 70.8% 2,901,425$ 68.0%Investment Income - - 145 - 145 N.A. 113 50.2%Debt Proceeds - - - - - N.A. - N.A.Miscellaneous 65,300 43,533 50,610 - 50,610 77.5% 74,845 104.6%

Total 4,098,400$ 2,732,266$ 2,906,311$ -$ 2,906,311$ 70.9% 2,976,383$ 68.6%

Expenditures:Wastewater Plant 2,261,141$ 1,507,427$ 1,500,181$ 726,081$ 2,226,262$ 98.5% 2,200,540$ 91.8%Wastewater Maint 965,837 643,891 610,757 2,029 612,786 63.4% 509,023 65.8%BMA Expenses 30,000 20,000 12,096 14,406 26,502 88.3% 14,518 50.1%Transfers Out 1,006,305 670,869 - 670,869 66.7% 490,235 66.7%Reserves 84,977 56,651 - - - 0.0% - N.A.

Total 4,348,260$ 2,227,969$ 2,793,903$ 742,516$ 3,536,419$ 81.3% 3,214,316$ 81.7%


Fund Balance 7/1 577,266$


Ending Fund Balance 689,674$

67% of Year Lapsed


COMBINED WASTEWATER OPERATING & BMA WASTEWATER FUNDSStatement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances



Year

Revenue:Water Fees 7,924,580$ 5,283,053$ 5,405,559$ -$ 5,405,559$ 68.2% 5,538,063$ 69.6%Investment Income - - 5,584 - 5,584 N.A. 6,661 61.9%Debt Proceeds - - - - - N.A. - N.A.Miscellaneous - - 13,654 - 13,654 N.A. 7,649 108.8%

Total 7,924,580$ 5,283,053$ 5,424,797$ -$ 5,424,797$ 68.5% 5,552,373$ 69.6%

Expenditures:Water Plant 2,833,458$ 1,888,972$ 1,596,493$ 1,175,703$ 2,772,196$ 97.8% 1,683,827$ 64.8%Water Administration 316,306 210,871 199,636 7,715 207,351 65.6% 188,929 56.8%Water Distribution 1,496,475 997,650 1,059,760 (46,585) 1,013,175 67.7% 870,348 67.3%BMA Expenses 3,155,000 2,103,333 1,549,582 1,233,225 2,782,807 88.2% 3,069,795 88.6%Transfers Out 1,524,290 1,016,193 1,016,194 - 1,016,194 66.7% 2,129,786 66.7%Reserves 171,487 114,325 - - - 0.0% - N.A.

Total 9,497,016$ 6,331,344$ 5,421,665$ 2,370,058$ 7,791,723$ 82.0% 7,942,685$ 73.0%





67% of Year Lapsed


COMBINED WATER OPERATING & BMA WATER FUNDSStatement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances



Year

Revenue:Collection Fees 4,491,427$ 2,994,285$ 2,909,101$ -$ 2,909,101$ 64.8% 2,899,130$ 65.9%Investment Income - - 2,361 - 2,361 N.A. 1,796 47.6%Miscellaneous 37,012 24,675 22,179 - 22,179 59.9% 29,376 62.0%

Total 4,528,439$ 3,018,960$ 2,933,641$ -$ 2,933,641$ 64.8% 2,930,302$ 65.8%

Expenditures:Sanitation 2,972,640$ 1,981,760$ 1,980,844$ (309,993)$ 1,670,851$ 56.2% 1,818,085$ 58.3%Transfers Out 1,307,712 871,808 871,812 - 871,812 66.7% 857,997 66.7%Reserves 128,659 85,773 - - - 0.0% - N.A.

Total 4,409,011$ 2,939,341$ 2,852,656$ (309,993)$ 2,542,663$ 57.7% 2,676,082$ 60.8%





67% of Year Lapsed


SANITATION FUNDStatement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances

Budget Actuals Percent of

Budget Special Revenue Funds:

Economic Development Fund 1,549,806 1,063,275 69%E-911 Fund 907,095 595,990 66%Special Library Fund 71,500 127,380 178%Special Museum Fund 20,063 19,483 97%Municipal Airport Fund - 53,720 N/AHarshfield Library Donation Fund - 181 N/ARestricted Revenue Fund 212,597 335,574 158%Golf Course Memorial Fund - 1,321 N/AJustice Assistance Grant Fund - 2,784 N/ANeighborhood Park Fund - 18 N/ACemetery Care Fund 3,800 1,245 33%Memorial Stadium Operating Fund 36,180 23,393 65%

Debt Service Fund 3,209,045 2,967,066 92%

Capital Project Funds:Sales Tax Capital Improvement Fund 2,763,617 1,842,159 67%Park Capital Improvement Fund - - N/AWastewater Capital Improvement Fund - 41,943 N/AWastewater Regulatory Capital Fund 1,400,000 1,043,198 75%City Hall Capital Improvement Fund 112,126 82,785 74%Storm Drainage Capital Improvement Fund - 12,554 N/ACommunity Development Block Grant Fund 231,000 - 0%2008B G.O. Bond Fund - 33 N/A2009 G.O. Bond Fund - 39 N/A2010 G.O. Bond Fund - 258 N/A2012 G.O. Bond Fund 55,759 37,916 68%2014 G.O. Bond Fund - 3,175 N/A2014B G.O. Bond Fund - 11,179 N/A2015 G.O. Bond Fund 2,000,000 40,019 2%

Proprietary Funds:Adams Golf Course Operating Fund 431,131 307,674 71%Sooner Pool Operating Fund 55,968 37,351 67%Frontier Pool Operating Fund 58,489 39,049 67%

Internal Service Funds:Worker's Compensation Fund 469,956 331,250 70%Health Insurance Fund 2,860,800 1,917,969 67%Auto Collision Insurance Fund 18,251 13,104 72%Stabilization Reserve Fund 673,315 448,875 67%Capital Improvement Reserve Fund 290,000 193,336 67%

Mausoleum Trust Fund - 17 N/A

67% of Year Lapsed

ALL OTHER FUNDSRevenue Budget Report - Budget Basis

Budget Actuals Percent of

Budget Special Revenue Funds:

Economic Development Fund 4,907,321 3,138,793 64%E-911 Fund 957,467 621,336 65%Special Library Fund 166,283 66,033 40%Special Museum Fund 57,110 40,037 70%Municipal Airport Fund 110,957 12,560 11%Harshfield Library Donation Fund 865,225 1,887 0%Restricted Revenue Fund 451,157 58,345 13%Golf Course Memorial Fund 23,706 23,669 100%Justice Assistance Grant Fund 33,182 3,080 9%Neighborhood Park Fund - - N/ACemetery Care Fund 79,996 2,200 3%Memorial Stadium Operating Fund 68,000 22,347 33%

Debt Service Fund 3,196,290 2,260,011 71%

Capital Project Funds:Sales Tax Capital Improvement Fund 4,928,692 833,484 17%Park Capital Improvement Fund - (28) N/AWastewater Capital Improvement Fund 326,333 595 0%Wastewater Regulatory Capital Fund 6,003,020 2,457,765 41%City Hall Capital Improvement Fund 385,191 72,472 19%Storm Drainage Capital Improvement Fund 92,493 - 0%Community Development Block Grant Fund 231,000 - 0%2008B G.O. Bond Fund 14,871 - 0%2009 G.O. Bond Fund 17,781 - 0%2010 G.O. Bond Fund 136,860 37,175 27%2012 G.O. Bond Fund 290,186 46,731 16%2014 G.O. Bond Fund 1,452,028 637 0%2014B G.O. Bond Fund 5,111,536 - 0%2015 G.O. Bond Fund 2,000,000 - 0%

Proprietary Funds:Adams Golf Course Operating Fund 467,106 321,146 69%Sooner Pool Operating Fund 49,422 2,815 6%Frontier Pool Operating Fund 61,302 7,996 13%

Internal Service Funds:Worker's Compensation Fund 425,000 225,953 53%Health Insurance Fund 3,259,989 1,452,788 45%Auto Collision Insurance Fund 300,000 18,099 6%Stabilization Reserve Fund 4,505,786 - 0%Capital Improvement Reserve Fund 2,087,500 804,104 39%

Mausoleum Trust Fund 8,264 - 0%

ALL OTHER FUNDSExpenditure Budget Report - Budget Basis

67% of Year Lapsed

Beginning of Year Change Current

Special Revenue Funds:Economic Development Fund 3,379,443 (1,745,518) 1,633,925 E-911 Fund 26,189 (12,951) 13,238 Special Library Fund 275,657 80,662 356,319 Special Museum Fund 139,058 (6,515) 132,543 Municipal Airport Fund 293,677 44,430 338,107 Harshfield Library Donation Fund 866,358 (1,004) 865,354 Restricted Revenue Fund 208,541 42,173 250,714 Golf Course Memorial Fund 25,062 (22,348) 2,714 Justice Assistance Grant Fund 40,672 1,244 41,916 Neighborhood Park Fund 8,090 18 8,108 Cemetery Care Fund 74,867 (955) 73,912 Memorial Stadium Operating Fund 18,831 (6,666) 12,165

Debt Service Fund 2,230,579 1,225,055 3,455,634

Capital Project Funds:Sales Tax Capital Improvement Fund 3,717,506 (281,461) 3,436,045 Park Capital Improvement Fund 88,198 (88,198) - Wastewater Capital Improvement Fund 326,252 41,348 367,600 Wastewater Regulatory Capital Fund 5,034,724 573,698 5,608,422 City Hall Capital Improvement Fund 244,737 27,789 272,526 Storm Drainage Capital Improvement Fund 43,778 12,554 56,332 Community Development Block Grant Fund - - - 2008B G.O. Bond Fund 15,335 33 15,368 2009 G.O. Bond Fund 17,782 39 17,821 2010 G.O. Bond Fund 136,868 (36,917) 99,951 2012 G.O. Bond Fund 348,000 (34,015) 313,985 2014 G.O. Bond Fund 1,454,299 2,538 1,456,837 2014B G.O. Bond Fund 5,120,022 11,179 5,131,201 2015 G.O. Bond Fund - 40,019 40,019

Proprietary Funds:Adams Golf Course Operating Fund 77,312 14,156 91,468 Sooner Pool Operating Fund 16,785 17,943 34,728 Frontier Pool Operating Fund 29,169 12,226 41,395

Internal Service Funds:Worker's Compensation Fund 16,148 138,425 154,573 Health Insurance Fund 571,515 528,402 1,099,917 Auto Collision Insurance Fund 280,184 (948) 279,236 Stabilization Reserve Fund 3,803,139 448,875 4,252,014 Capital Improvement Reserve Fund 3,320,972 (604,968) 2,716,004

Mausoleum Trust Fund 7,849 17 7,866

ALL OTHER FUNDSFund Balance Report - Modified Cash Basis

67% of Year Lapsed

600 Publish: Bartlesville Examiner-Enterprise

Block Ad - Non-Legal Section

Sunday, March 20, 2016

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS

REGARDING THE ADOPTION OF A TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT:

INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10, CITY OF BARTLESVILLE

SILVER LAKE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT

IN BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA

7:00 PM MONDAY, APRIL 4, 2016

7:00 PM MONDAY, APRIL 18, 2016

TO ALL INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS:

The City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma (the “City”) invites and encourages all interested citizens and other

interested parties to attend two public hearings scheduled for Monday, April 4, 2016, at 7:00 P.M., and

Monday, April 18, 2016, at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers located at City Hall, 401 S. Johnstone

Ave., Bartlesville, Oklahoma.

The purpose of the first hearing shall be for information and questions, and the second hearing shall be for

persons to have an opportunity to be heard concerning proposed Increment District No. 10, City of

Bartlesville (the “Increment District” or “Silver Lake Village TIF”) on the following described property

known as Tract A, and the Silver Lake Village Project Plan (the “Project Plan”).

TRACT A

The proposed Increment District generally contains an area bordered on the north by the North Section Line

of Section 8, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately Frank Phillips Boulevard), on the east by

the Half Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately 0.5 miles

east of Silver Lake Road), on the west by the West Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North,

Range 13 East (approximately Silver Lake Road), and on the south by the Half Section Line of Section 17,

Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately the Woodland Park subdivision). The subject area

comprises approximately 265.54 acres lying in the West Half of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North,

Range 13 East of the Indian Meridian, Washington County, Oklahoma, and more particularly described as

follows:

All of the Northwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East of the Indian

Meridian, Washington County, Oklahoma, EXCEPT the following tracts:

o The East 100 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 25, Woodland Park 12th Addition or any

portion thereof lying within said Northwest Quarter;

o All land, lots and rights-of-way platted as part of the Crowne Point Addition; and

o All or any portion thereof of Lots 1 through 6 inclusive, Block 47, Woodland Park 19th

Addition, which are located within said Northwest Quarter, together with any adjacent

platted rights-of-way;

o All or any portion thereof of Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 47, Amendment to Woodland Park

19th Addition, which are located within said Northwest Quarter;

o All or any portion thereof of Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 47, Woodland Park 21stAddition,

which are located within said Northwest Quarter;

o Containing 5,093,906.4 square feet or 116.94 acres of land, more or less;

Together with all of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 26 North, Range 13 East of

the Indian Meridian, Washington County, Oklahoma, except the North 584.2 feet of the East 850

feet thereof, containing 6,473,030 square feet or 148.6 acres of land, more or less.

A map of the proposed Silver Lake Village TIF boundaries and the proposed Project Area (each as described

in the Project Plan) is provided below. The boundaries of the Silver Lake Village TIF and the Project Area

are contiguous. The proposed Increment District (Silver Lake Village TIF) is the area within which ad

valorem tax revenue and sales tax revenue may be captured and utilized for the payment of Silver Lake

Village TIF Project Costs. The proposed Project Area is the area within which Project construction

activities will take place.

Copies of the Silver Lake Village Project Plan may be obtained free of charge at the City Clerk’s Office

located in City Hall, 401 S. Johnstone Ave., Bartlesville, Oklahoma, any time after Monday, March 21,

2016, during regular business hours.

The Silver Lake Village Project Plan describes a mixed-use development project that contemplates the

construction of a multi-phase retail center comprising a total of approximately 24 acres and over 200,000

square feet of new retail shopping centers (upon full build-out) and a $20 million high-quality market rate

multi-family residential complex of 200 dwelling units. The purpose of the Increment District (as defined

herein) is to stimulate the construction of such commercial retail and multi-family residential structures to

meet an unmet housing demand in the City and provide enhanced retail shopping opportunities for

Bartlesville residents, all by facilitating the payment of certain infrastructure and related development costs

necessary to make certain property viable for housing and retail development (collectively, the “Project”).

Specifically, the revenues generated by the Increment District will be utilized to offset the significant

infrastructure improvements necessary to develop the site and elevate a portion of land currently located

within a FEMA identified flood plain and offset that change with appropriate increases in storm water

detention and flood storage space. Proposed Project Costs (as described in the Project Plan) include

improvements to the public infrastructure systems necessary to develop the site, including, but not limited

to, sanitary sewer, water, storm water drainage, flood storage areas, and streets and traffic systems serving

the Project site, acquisition of land, development of public amenities, including but not limited to, public

park, trails, and recreational facilities, and organizational and financing costs in connection with the

establishment of the Silver Lake Village TIF. The proposed Project Costs total approximately $15,000,000.

Incremental increases in ad valorem tax revenue and sales tax revenue that are generated within the

boundaries of the Silver Lake Village TIF will serve as the revenue source for financing the proposed

Project Costs. Said revenues are the public revenues directly attributable to the Project resulting from

establishment of the Silver Lake Village TIF.

Mike Bailey, City Clerk

City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma

401 South Johnstone Avenue

Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74003

Phone: (918) 338-4222

MAP OF INCREMENT DISTRICT

Containing 265.54 acres, more or less

Final Project Plan Dated: 03/16/2016 Adopted: 04/18/2016

SILVER LAKE VILLAGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN

Prepared by:

CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TOM GORMAN, MAYOR, WARD 3

TED LOCKIN, WARD 1 JOHN KANE, WARD 2

DR. JOSEPH CALLAHAN, WARD 4 DALE COPELAND, WARD 5

ED GORDON, CITY MANAGER

LISA BEEMAN, DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

THE PUBLIC FINANCE LAW GROUP PLLC 5657 N. CLASSEN BOULEVARD, SUITE 100

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 73118 (405) 235-3413


INDEX

I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ...........................................................................................1

II. PROJECT AREA AND INCREMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES ................................3

III. ELIGIBILITY OF PROJECT .............................................................................................3

IV. OBJECTIVES .....................................................................................................................4

V. FINANCIAL IMPACTS .....................................................................................................4

VI. STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL ACTIONS .......................................................................6

VII. ESTABLISHMENT OF INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10, CITY OF BARTLESVILLE ................................................................................................7

VIII. PROJECT AND INCREMENT DISTRICT AUTHORIZATIONS ...................................8

IX. BUDGET OF ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS TO BE FINANCED FROM INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10 .........................................................................8

X. METHODS OF FINANCING PROJECT COSTS, EXPECTED SOURCES OF REVENUES, AND TIME WHEN COSTS OR MONETARY OBLIGATIONS ARE TO BE INCURRED ......................................................................11

XI. FINANCING REVENUE SOURCES ..............................................................................14

XII. PUBLIC REVENUE ESTIMATED TO ACCRUE FROM THE PROJECT AND OTHER ECONOMIC IMPACTS ............................................................................15

XIII. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC INVESTMENTS EXPECTED FOR THE PROJECT ...........16

XIV. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS .................................................................................16

EXHIBIT “A” MAP OF INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10

EXHIBIT “B” INCREMENT DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION

EXHIBIT “C” MAP OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA

EXHIBIT “D” PROJECT AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION

EXHIBIT “E” PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE INCREMENT DISTRICT

EXHIBIT “F” PRELIMINARY SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SILVER LAKE VILLAGE PROJECT


SILVER LAKE VILLAGE

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN

I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT

This Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project Plan (the “Project Plan”) describes a mixed-use development that contemplates construction on a site of approximately 115 acres of over 200,000 square feet of new retail shopping centers (upon full build-out) and a $20 million high-quality market rate multi-family residential complex of 200 dwelling units in the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma (the “City”). The purpose of the Increment District (as defined herein) is to stimulate the construction of such commercial retail and multi-family residential structures to meet an unmet housing demand and provide enhanced retail shopping opportunities for residents of the City, all by facilitating the payment of certain infrastructure costs necessary to make certain property viable for housing and retail development (collectively, the “Project”).

The City recognizes the difficulty in development of the area due to significant costs necessary to correct current conditions at the planned Project site, including specifically the significant infrastructure improvements necessary to raise a portion of the land currently in the 100 year floodplain and offset that corresponding elevation change with appropriate increases in water detention space. As such, the Project will require the construction of one large or several smaller detention facilities to accommodate various flood events up to the base flood elevation. The creation of the additional detention facilities will serve as the fill necessary to raise the property to the appropriate levels for development within the floodplain. Additionally, improvements will be made to correct deficiencies in drainage, streets, curbs, sidewalks and traffic systems serving the Project site.

It is anticipated that the Project will occur over as many as four (4) phases for full build- out based on market demand and timing considerations of the various developers. The City, acting through the Bartlesville Development Authority, has heretofore solicited proposals from prospective developers for a portion of property within the proposed Increment District that will infuse significant capital investment. The City has identified a proposal submitted by GBT Realty Corp. (including its successors and assigns, referred to herein as “GBT”) for the Phase I development. The Phase I retail shopping center development will occur on approximately 13 acres located directly east of the existing Lowe’s building on the south side of Adams Boulevard. Primary building construction related to Phase I of this retail development will consist of a retail shopping center with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of retail space with related off-street parking, plus the development of three outparcels (collectively, “Phase I”) within the Increment District at an estimated capital investment cost of $24.7 million. GBT has identified within its proposal the need for public assistance to facilitate a successful retail development project.

A second phase of the retail shopping center will occur on approximately 9 acres located east of the Phase I site and will consist of a maximum of 100,000 square feet of building space,


2

with related off-street parking (“Phase II”). Phase II is expected to commence following the completion of Phase I and has an estimated capital investment of $15 million.

Phase III will consist of a Class A multi-family residential development on an approximately 10-acre tract of land and have a maximum of 200 apartments (“Phase III”). The apartments will feature high-end exterior and interior amenities, be of the highest quality construction with the highest quality materials, consist of well merchandised quality landscaping, have an attractive club building, and have other on-site and off-site amenities. The Phase III development is especially important as the City has had significant difficulty in attracting the development of new high-quality multi-family residential developments over the past 25 years. The Phase III improvements are estimated to have an initial capital investment of $20 million. Phase IV will involve a small retail development of approximately 15,000 square feet of building space, with related off street parking (“Phase IV”). The Phase IV development is expected to occur on approximately 2 acres of land located directly south of the existing Lowe’s building along Silver Lake Road and immediately adjacent to the North of the proposed Phase III multi-family residential development. Phase IV of the project has an estimated capital investment of $3.2 million. The total estimated capital investment in the Silver Lake Village Project is $63 million.

The City has determined the need to authorize the following Project Costs (collectively referred to herein as the “Project Costs”) to encourage the development of the Project:

• $6.75 million for the purpose of paying the costs of certain infrastructure improvements that are required to serve the Silver Lake Village Project site, including specifically drainage improvements, site leveling and preparation, required flood plain compensatory storage, stormwater detention, and perimeter buffer areas (the “Site Improvement Costs”).

• $4.4 million for acquisition or reimbursement for the acquisition of the property within the Increment District, for the purpose of encourage more efficient land use and further development of the site for additional green space (the “Land Acquisition Costs”).

• $2.5 million for public infrastructure improvements, including drainage, street, and quality of life improvements (including but not limited to walking trails, fishing docks, playgrounds, picnic or recreational fields to be determined by the City at a later time), necessary to serve the other portions of the Increment District (the “Public Improvement Costs”).

The Project will be supported by a direct incentive in the form of payment of and/or reimbursement of certain Site Improvement Costs and Land Acquisition Costs to GBT for the purpose of developing Phase I of the site into a retail shopping center, in an amount up to approximately $4.2 million. The Project Plan contemplates that additional direct incentives for the payment of and/or reimbursement of the authorized Project Costs would be available for additional phases supporting the Project, but in no event will exceed the total authorized Project Costs as set forth in this Project Plan.


3

This Project Plan provides that the City will enter into a development agreement(s) with GBT (relating to Phase I of the Project) and other interested parties as necessary (all as required by the Local Development Act defined herein) for the purpose of accomplishing the improvements identified as the Project Costs associated with the various phases of the Project. The TIF Revenues will be used to pay and/or reimburse the Project Costs and/or pay debt service on obligations issued to pay and/or reimburse said Project Costs. The Site Improvement Costs related to the Silver Lake Village Project will be expended and the related improvements completed as soon as possible in order to facilitate the expedient completion of the proposed commercial retail shopping center. The Public Improvement Costs, the Land Acquisition Costs, and the remaining Site Improvement Costs will be expended and the related improvements completed in phases as soon as feasible and as necessary in support of the Project.

Based solely on the proposed Silver Lake Village Project, the initial retail and other commercial development within the Increment District could result in a potential initial taxable capital investment of approximately $63 million, and potential annual taxable sales of approximately $56 million upon full build-out. The City anticipates that it will solicit further development proposals, and the additional retail, commercial, and residential development may likely result in significant additional taxable capital investment and taxable sales, however those amounts cannot be reasonably quantified at this time. The actual amount of retail and other commercial capital investment will be largely dependent on the specific nature of the retail and commercial establishments that ultimately locate in the area, including subsequent phases of retail, commercial and other residential development. Please see Exhibit “E” for a more detailed description of projected development within Project Area (as defined herein). Please see Exhibit “F” for a Preliminary Site Development Plan for the Silver Lake Village retail development.

II. PROJECT AREA AND INCREMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES

The Increment District is the specific geographic area within which the identified tax increments will be generated and utilized as set forth in this Project Plan (referred to herein as the “Increment District”). The Project Area is the area within which all project activities, including construction of the supporting public improvements, will take place (referred to herein as the “Project Area”). The Increment District and Project Area are contiguous. All of the contemplated project activities will occur within the boundaries of the Increment District. A map showing the Increment District is attached as Exhibit “A”. The legal description of the Increment District is set forth in Exhibit “B”. A map showing the Project Area is attached as Exhibit “C”. The legal description of the Project Area is set forth in Exhibit “D”.

III. ELIGIBILITY OF PROJECT

The Project Area (including the Increment District) is undeveloped and/or underdeveloped within the meaning of Article 10, §6C of the Oklahoma Constitution and the Local Development Act, 62 O.S. §850, et seq. (the “Local Development Act”). The Project


4

Area (including the Increment District) is located in a reinvestment area (as defined in Section 853(17) of the Local Development Act) and is therefore eligible for assistance under the Local Development Act.

The Increment District comprises an area where investment, development and economic growth have not occurred, and which requires significant public infrastructure improvements to serve as a catalyst to expand employment opportunities, to attract major investment in the area, attract high-quality multi-family residential development and to enhance the tax base.

IV. OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the Project and Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville, is to support the achievement of the economic development objectives of the City in order to:

A. Create a significant commercial development within the City that will act as a catalyst for additional development within the community;

B. Construct a high-quality market rate multi-family residential development within the City that will serve an important unmet housing demand in the City;

C. Encourage persons in the existing workforce to live within the community;

D. Attract major investment in the area;

E. Serve as a catalyst for retaining and expanding employment in the area;

F. Promote economic development to increase tax revenues, raise property values, and improve economic stability;

G. Preserve and enhance the tax base; and

H. Make possible investment, development and economic growth which would otherwise be difficult or impossible without the project and the apportionment of ad valorem taxes and sales and use taxes from within the Increment District.

V. FINANCIAL IMPACTS

The proposed private development will generate tax increments necessary to pay all or a portion of the authorized costs of the Project. Without the proposed Increment District, significant development within the area would be unlikely and any significant increases in ad valorem taxes and sales and use taxes would be extremely improbable.


5

The proposed development Project does not create a significant increase in demand for services or costs to the affected taxing entities other than the City, whose public sector costs will be offset by apportioned tax increments as provided in this Project Plan.

The affected ad valorem taxing jurisdictions are Washington County, the Washington County Health Department, the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, Tri-County Technology District No. 1, and Bartlesville Independent Public School District No. 30. The general and intangible impacts on the affected taxing jurisdictions from implementation of this Project Plan are positive and include the achievement of the objectives set forth in Section IV of this Project Plan.

The creation of the Increment District will allow the City to apportion the incremental increase in ad valorem tax revenues and sales and use tax revenues generated through construction and operation of the commercial and other developments within the Increment District for the purpose of paying Project Costs (as defined herein) either through direct payment and/or reimbursement and/or paying debt service on tax apportionment bonds to be issued by a public trust created under Title 60, Oklahoma Statutes 2011, Section 176 et seq., for the benefit of the City. The proceeds of any such bonds shall be utilized for the Project Costs.

It is anticipated that a successful development will result in significant long term benefits to the affected ad valorem taxing jurisdictions without causing significant (if any) negative impact on the existing tax base during the term of the Increment District. The formation of an Increment District should result in no net loss in existing ad valorem tax revenue to each of the affected ad valorem taxing jurisdictions. The formation of the Increment District will cause the affected ad valorem taxing jurisdictions to forgo a portion of any new incremental ad valorem tax revenue generated from real and personal property values during the term of the Increment District, but will not affect the existing ad valorem tax base within the Increment District. Upon expiration of the Increment District, the affected ad valorem taxing jurisdictions could see an aggregate net gain in annual ad valorem tax revenues in excess of approximately $882,000 (based on an initial total capital investment of approximately $63 million).

Anticipated impacts on the ad valorem taxing jurisdictions include population growth and the demand for services created thereby. The direct impact on each ad valorem taxing jurisdiction is the loss of a portion of the new ad valorem tax increment revenues during the period of apportionment. An additional impact on the school district is that a portion of the new valuation of the Increment District will not count for, and will therefore limit, the bonding capacity of the school district. However, the school district does realize additional revenue from other sources on a per pupil basis. These impacts may be mitigated by any increase in valuation of property outside the Increment District (for example, successful development enhances the property values surrounding the Increment District), and by any increase in new housing outside the Increment District (for example, successful development results in net population gain to the City creating demand for new housing).

The proposed Project does create a significant increase in demand for utility services from the City, however, public sector costs should be more than offset by apportioned tax increments as provided in this Project Plan. The proposed development within the Increment District should generate significant increases in annual water and sewer utility revenues.


6

The formation of an Increment District should also result in no net loss in existing sales and use tax revenue to the City, as the affected sales tax jurisdiction. The City is not currently collecting any sales tax from within the boundaries of the proposed Increment District so the corresponding baseline sales tax collection level is zero. A potentially negative impact of utilizing incremental sales tax revenues to promote the creation of a significant retail shopping development is the potential for transfer of sales tax dollars from existing retail establishments located outside the Increment District to new retail establishments located inside the Increment District (the “Substitution Rate”). The City has assumed a Substitution Rate of approximately 50% of the retail sales within the proposed Increment District that will come from the transfer of monies spent at other retail establishments within the City. To offset this concern, the Increment District will only capture approximately 30% of the incremental sales tax revenues (the equivalent of 1.02% of the total 3.40% sales tax levied by the City); provided however, 50% of the incremental sales tax revenues shall be captured during the first twelve months of operation of a retail establishment located within the Increment District, 30% captured in the second 12 months and 10% captured in the third 12 months (collectively, the “Reserve Amount”). Upon full funding of the Reserve Amount, the Increment District will continue to capture 30% of the incremental sales tax revenues to provide additional financial support, if necessary, to pay debt service on TIF Bonds issued to pay authorized project costs. If the incremental sales tax revenues are not needed for the payment of debt service on TIF Bonds, said incremental sales tax revenues shall be reallocated as specified herein. Upon completion of the Project based on the assumed Substitution Rate, the City could realize an estimated gross gain in annual sales and use tax revenues in the approximate amount of $950,000, and upon expiration of the Increment District, an estimated gross gain in annual sales and use tax revenues of approximately $1.3 million. The Substitution Rate is an estimate and cannot be fully determined until full build-out of the Project and analysis of all sales tax collections occurring within the City. These impacts may be mitigated by any decrease in sales tax collections outside the increment district (for example, potential decline in overall sales of competing businesses) but may be augmented by the increased retention of customer spending within the City (for example, by reducing the leakage of sales to other Tulsa metro locales by offering a wider and more diversified shopping selection within the City).

Additional development within the Increment District will likely generate further increases in ad valorem tax revenues and sales tax revenues to the benefit of all of the affected taxing jurisdictions.

VI. STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL ACTIONS

Implementation actions for the project, including all necessary, appropriate and supportive steps, will consist of the following:

A. Site preparation, planning and construction of public improvements necessary to support the development project;


7

B. Acquisition by private developers of any additional properties necessary for the development project including connecting public easements;

C. Negotiation, preparation, execution, and implementation of development agreements, including agreements for financing and construction by private developers, as authorized by the Local Development Act. Such agreements may include the granting of incentives for private developers to complete certain improvements within the project area;

D. Issuance of tax apportionment bonds or other debt issuance necessary to provide funds for Project Costs;

E. All other actions necessary and appropriate to carry out the development project as authorized by the Local Development Act.

VII. ESTABLISHMENT OF INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10, CITY OF BARTLESVILLE

Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville shall be created upon adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma approving this Project Plan. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Development Act, the following incremental revenues shall be apportioned and used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs authorized pursuant to Section IX of this Project Plan. The apportionment of the incremental revenues shall continue for that period required for the payment of the Project Costs, or a period of approximately twenty-five (25) years (ending June 30, 2041, and referred to as the “Expiration Date”), whichever is less:

A. One hundred percent (100%) of the incremental real and personal property ad valorem taxes generated within the Increment District, in excess of the real and personal property ad valorem taxes generated from the base assessed value of the Increment District, and as otherwise determined pursuant to the Local Development Act (collectively, the “Ad Valorem Increment Revenues”); provided that all such Ad Valorem Increment Revenues shall be pledged as security for the payment of the TIF Bonds (as defined herein) or otherwise used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs authorized pursuant to Section IX of this Project Plan.

B. Up to thirty percent (30%) of the incremental sales and use tax revenues derived from the Increment District, representing the equivalent of 1.02% sales and use tax levied by the City pursuant to Chapter 18, Article II, Section 18-20 et seq., of the Bartlesville Code of Ordinances, as such Code of Ordinances may be amended, replaced, extended, superseded, terminated, or otherwise modified from time to time (the “Sales Tax Increment Revenues”, and together with the Ad Valorem Increment Revenues, referred to herein as the “TIF Revenues” ); provided however, 50% of the incremental sales tax revenues shall be captured during the first twelve months of operation of a retail establishment located within the Increment District, 30% captured in the second 12 months and 10% captured in the third 12 months; provided further that all such Sales Tax Increment Revenues shall be pledged as security for the


8

payment of the TIF Bonds or otherwise used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs authorized pursuant to Section IX of this Project Plan.

VIII. PROJECT AND INCREMENT DISTRICT AUTHORIZATIONS

A. Upon adoption of an Ordinance of the City approving this Project Plan, the City is hereby designated and authorized as the public entity to carry out and administer the provisions of this Project Plan and to exercise all powers necessary or appropriate thereto, including, without limitation, those powers described in Section 854 of the Local Development Act.

B. The City may create a new public trust with the City named as its beneficiary, and/or designate an existing public trust with the City named as its beneficiary (said public trust referred to herein as the “Authority”), and said Authority shall be the public entity designated by the City to assist in carrying out and administering the provisions of this Project Plan and authorized to exercise all powers necessary or appropriate thereto pursuant to Title 62, Section 854 of the Local Development Act, except for approval of this Project Plan and those powers enumerated in paragraphs 1, 4, 7, and 16 of that section, which powers shall be reserved to the City.

C. The person in charge of implementation of this Project Plan in accordance with the provisions, authorizations and respective delegations of responsibilities contained herein is Mr. Ed Gordon, City Manager. Mr. Gordon, or his successor as City Manager, is authorized to empower one or more designees to exercise responsibilities in connection with project implementation.

IX. BUDGET OF ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS TO BE FINANCED FROM INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10

Project Costs to be financed by the apportionment of tax increments from the Increment District include: (i) the planning, design, acquisition, site preparation and/or construction of the Site Improvement Costs, the Public Improvement Costs, and the Land Acquisition Costs (not to exceed an aggregate total of $15,000,000.00); (ii) the payment of assistance in development financing (as authorized by Section 853(14)(o) of the Local Development Act) to a third party as reimbursement for the payment of Site Improvement Costs; and (iii) the direct or incidental costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the City or the Authority (as contemplated in Title 62, Section 853(14)(e) of the Local Development Act) in organizing, supervising, implementing and administering this Project Plan, including, but not limited to, payment and/or reimbursement of costs advanced in connection with the preparation and approval of this Project Plan, administrative costs, organizational costs, professional service costs, including those incurred for architectural, planning, engineering, legal and financial advices and services, and costs for determining or re-determining the base assessed value of the Increment District, financing costs and fees, and principal, interest (including capitalized interest), and prepayment premium paid on debt service and/or any reimbursement obligation.


9

The total estimate of Project Costs that may be made available for improvements from apportioned tax revenues shall be $14.9 million (including all engineering, construction, planning, and contingency costs). An additional amount of $100,000.00 will be made available for Organizational Costs associated with establishing the Increment District. Apportioned tax revenues in excess of the amounts needed for Project Costs may be utilized if necessary (x) to pay interest and other financing costs, including capitalized interest, as well as to fund any reasonably required reserves associated with obligations issued to fund said improvements and/or (y) to pay the reasonable costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the City or the Authority in implementing and administering this Project Plan.

PROJECT COST BUDGET ITEMS LINE-ITEM COST

Site Improvement Costs 6,750,000.00

Land Acquistion Costs 4,400,000.00

Public Improvement Costs 2,500,000.00

Contingency 1,250,000.00

Organizational Costs 100,000.00

TOTAL AUTHORIZED PROJECT COSTS* $15,000,000.00

* NOTE: Individual line-item amounts are estimated and subject to final determination, however, subject to the following paragraph, the Total Authorized Project Costs is a fixed, not to exceed amount (plus any amounts necessary to pay interest, capitalized interest, costs of issuance, and establish reserve funds in connection with the issuance of TIF Bonds and any amounts necessary to pay or reimburse the costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the City or the Authority in implementing and administering this Project Plan (as contemplated in Title 62, Section 853(14)(e) of the Local Development Act), including any interest component pursuant to a reimbursement obligation).

X. METHODS OF FINANCING PROJECT COSTS, EXPECTED SOURCES OF REVENUES, AND TIME WHEN COSTS OR MONETARY OBLIGATIONS ARE TO BE INCURRED

A. Methods of Financing. It is expected that the Project Costs will be paid from proceeds of the Authority’s tax apportionment bonds or notes to be issued in one or more series (collectively, the “TIF Bonds”). Payment of principal and interest due on the TIF Bonds will be paid from available TIF Revenues. Certain Project Costs may be directly paid by a third


10

party developer or the City and reimbursed from proceeds of the TIF Bonds. Alternately, certain Project Costs may also be directly paid by a third party developer or the City and reimbursed from TIF Revenues in excess of those needed for debt service on the TIF Bonds. Certain other costs of the Project may be paid from such other funds of the City or the Authority as may be lawfully used for the purposes hereinabove stated, including proceeds of certain debt obligations issued by the Authority and secured by a pledge of general sales tax, utility, or other available revenues.

B. Expected Sources of Revenues. The payment of Project Costs, including principal, interest and any premium on the redemption of any TIF Bonds, will be made from one or more of the following sources of TIF Revenues:

(i) Ad Valorem Increment Revenues. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Development Act, one hundred percent (100%) of the increments of real and personal property ad valorem taxes generated within the Increment District, in excess of the real and personal property ad valorem taxes generated from the base assessed value of the Increment District, as such increments are determined and defined pursuant to the Local Development Act (i.e., the “Ad Valorem Increment Revenues”), are to be apportioned and set aside from all other ad valorem taxes levied within the Increment District, to be used exclusively for:

(a) the payment of principal, interest and premium, if any, on the TIF Bonds, issued pursuant to Section 863 of the Local Development Act;

(b) to make payments, if required, to satisfy or replenish any reserve requirement established with respect to the TIF Bonds;

(c) the payment of Project Costs incurred in connection with the development or construction of those projects listed in this Project Plan;

(d) the reimbursement of a developer, including any interest component (pursuant to a development agreement with the City), the City, or any agency thereof (including the Authority), which has paid Project Costs from funds which were not increments derived from the Increment District, but only to the extent that such sums were actually paid; and

(e) to the extent necessary, the reimbursement to the City of any incremental sales tax revenues expended with respect to the TIF Bonds.

Pursuant to the Local Development Act, the Ad Valorem Increment Revenues apportioned hereunder shall be transferred by the Washington County Treasurer to a special fund to be known as the “Increment District No. 10 - Apportionment Fund” (hereinafter, the “Apportionment Fund”), which fund will be held by and be the property of the City (except that such fund may also be held by the Authority or a trustee acting on behalf of the Authority). No portion of such increments and no portion of the Apportionment Fund shall constitute a part of the general fund of the City. All Ad Valorem Increment Revenues so collected shall be placed into a separate account created


11

within the Apportionment Fund and shall be pledged as security for the payment of the TIF Bonds or otherwise used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs (such account being hereinafter referred to as the “Ad Valorem Tax Increment Revenue Account”).

The apportionment of ad valorem taxes pursuant to this section shall terminate upon the final payment of, or reimbursement for, all Project Costs incurred in connection with the projects listed in this Project Plan, and the payment of all outstanding principal, accrued interest, and premium due on the TIF Bonds; provided, however, that in no case shall the apportionment of revenues pursuant hereto extend beyond the Expiration Date.

In the event that any portion of the principal of or interest on the TIF Bonds, issued in connection herewith, or any amount due and owing for reimbursement under a development agreement entered into by the City, remains unpaid as of the Expiration Date, then the Increment District shall not terminate until the increment apportioned during the term of the Increment District is actually received by the Apportionment Fund, even if the receipt of such revenues occurs subsequent to the Expiration Date.

(ii) Sales Tax Increment Revenues. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Development Act, up to thirty percent (30%) of the incremental sales and use tax revenues derived from the Increment District, representing an aggregate total of 1.02% sales and use tax levied by the City pursuant to Chapter 18, Article II, Section 18-20 et seq., as such Code of Ordinances may be amended, replaced, extended, superseded, terminated, or otherwise modified from time to time, and generated within or sourced to the Increment District, as such increment is hereinafter determined and defined pursuant to the Local Development Act (i.e., the “Sales Tax Increment Revenues”), are to be apportioned and set aside from all other sales and use taxes levied within the Increment District, provided however, 50% of the incremental sales tax revenues shall be captured during the first twelve months of operation of a retail establishment located within the Increment District, 30% captured in the second 12 months and 10% captured in the third 12 months, to be used exclusively for:



(c) the payment of Project Costs incurred in connection with the development or construction of those projects listed in this Project Plan; and

(d) the reimbursement of a developer, including any interest component (pursuant to a development agreement with the City), the City, or any agency thereof (including the Authority), which has paid Project Costs from funds which were not increments derived from the Increment District, but only to the extent that such sums were actually paid.


12

Provided, it is the intent of the Project Plan to allow for the capture of up to 30% of the Sales Tax Increment Revenues generated within the Increment District to be pledged as additional security for the payment of any TIF Bonds issued to finance Project Costs contemplated within the Project Plan. It is currently expected that Ad Valorem Increment Revenues will provide sufficient revenue to finance the Project Costs and the Incremental Sales Tax Revenues will pass through to the City for authorized purposes on a monthly basis so long as they are not needed for debt service on any TIF Bonds; provided however, it is further the intent of the Project Plan to capture 50% of the incremental sales tax revenues during the first twelve months of operation of each retail establishment located within the Increment District, 30% captured in the second twelve months, and 10% captured in the third twelve months, which will be retained and used to accumulate a reserve for any TIF Bonds issued to finance Project Costs. In the event that any Sales Tax Increment Revenues are expended from the reserve, or are needed for the payment of principal and interest on any TIF Bonds, it is expected that those expenditures will be reimbursed from the collection of future Ad Valorem Increment Revenues. It is the intent of this Project Plan that any Sales Tax Increment Revenues collected within the Increment District will be returned to the City upon the completion of the objectives of the Project Plan.

Provided, however, the remaining unapportioned seventy percent (70%) of the incremental sales and use tax revenues derived from the Increment District, representing the equivalent of 2.38% of the total 3.40% sales and use tax levied by the City, shall be retained by the City and utilized for any lawful purpose consistent with the aforementioned Code of Ordinances. Provided further, that if said rate of sales and use tax levied by the City shall increase or decrease pursuant to the Code of Ordinances, said percentages of allocation shall automatically be revised in a manner that will yield Sales Tax Increment Revenues equivalent to the proceeds of a 1.02% of the total 3.40% sales and use tax rate.

Provided, further, the increment of sales and use taxes upon which the Sales Tax Increment Revenues is calculated shall be reduced by the amount of sales tax revenues generated by any existing businesses (currently located within the City, but outside the boundaries of the Increment District) that cease operations at their existing location and relocate to within the Increment District (said reduction referred to herein as a “Transfer Adjustment”). Said amount of annual reduction shall be calculated based on the sales tax collections during the twelve month period prior to closing the previous location. For purposes of determining the incremental portion of the sales taxes generated within the District, the Mayor of the City shall certify as the “base sales tax amount” the annual sales taxes received by the City that were generated within or sourced to the area comprising the Increment District between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2015. If necessary for such certification, said base amount may be determined using reasonable estimates prepared by the City Clerk. All sales tax revenue generated within the Increment District and received by the City which are in excess of such base amount, net of any Transfer Adjustment, shall be considered to be the “increment” subject to apportionment by this section.


13

In addition to sales and use tax generated from retail sales, the Sales Tax Increment Revenues shall include all sales and use tax generated from actual construction occurring within the Increment District. The City shall to the extent necessary establish procedures related to the calculation and determination of construction related sales and use tax revenue qualifying as Sales Tax Increment Revenues. Such procedures shall stipulate that construction related Sales Tax Increment Revenues be derived only from new construction activities occurring within the Increment District. The City shall be entitled to rely on certifications of actual construction costs provided by a developer or related party in connection with determining any applicable Sales Tax Increment Revenues.

Pursuant to the Local Development Act, the Sales Tax Increment Revenues apportioned hereunder and so collected shall be placed into a separate account created within the Apportionment Fund (such account being hereinafter referred to as the “Sales Tax Increment Revenue Account”) and shall be pledged as security for the payment of the TIF Bonds or otherwise used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs. No portion of such increments and no portion of the Apportionment Fund shall constitute a part of the general fund of the City.

The apportionment of sales and use taxes pursuant to this section shall terminate upon the final payment of, or reimbursement for, all Project Costs incurred in connection with the projects listed in this Project Plan, and the payment of all outstanding principal, accrued interest, and premium due on the TIF Bonds; provided, however, that in no case shall the apportionment of revenues pursuant hereto extend beyond the Expiration Date.

In the event that any portion of the principal of or interest on the TIF Bonds, issued in connection herewith, or any amount due and owing for reimbursement under a development agreement entered into by the City, remains unpaid as of the end of the Expiration Date, then the Increment District shall not terminate until the increment apportioned during the term of the Increment District is actually received by the Apportionment Fund, even if the receipt of such revenues occurs subsequent to the Expiration Date.

C. Time When Costs Or Monetary Obligations Are To Be Incurred. It is estimated that the time frame for incurring a significant portion of the Project Costs will be within three years from the date of approval of this Project Plan; however, certain Project Costs will not be incurred until appropriate development projects within the Increment District are identified by the City. It is anticipated that most Project Costs will be paid from proceeds of TIF Bonds issued by the Authority, provided however, certain Project Costs may be directly paid or reimbursed from apportioned TIF Revenues.

D. Flow of Funds; Excess Revenues.

During the term of the Increment District, TIF Revenues shall be utilized as follows:


14

FIRST: The payment of principal, accrued interest, and premium, if any, due on the TIF Bonds;

SECOND: Transfer to any debt service reserve established in connection with the TIF Bonds in such amounts as may be necessary to restore the reserve to its prescribed levels;

THIRD: All amounts remaining shall thereafter be utilized for (i) payment and/or reimbursement of authorized Project Costs (including any interest component pursuant to a development agreement); (ii) pre-payment of principal on the TIF Bonds until such time as all TIF Bonds are retired; or (iii) in the case of the Sales Tax Increment Revenues, any amounts not needed for payment of scheduled debt service on the TIF Bonds or the funding/replenishment of a debt service reserve may be periodically transferred to the City for deposit into the General Fund or to the appropriate special fund and utilized for any lawful purpose; and

FOURTH: Upon retirement of all TIF Bonds and payment of all Project Costs, (a) any remaining Ad Valorem Increment Revenues shall be transferred to the various ad valorem taxing jurisdictions, in the same percentages as originally collected, as determined by reference to the millage levied by each of the various ad valorem taxing jurisdictions for the related tax year, excluding sinking fund levies, and (b) any remaining Sales Tax Increment Revenues shall be transferred to the City for deposit into the General Fund or to the appropriate special fund, in each case consistent with the provisions of the Local Development Act.

XI. FINANCING REVENUE SOURCES

The TIF Revenues are expected to finance all or a portion of the Project Costs authorized by Section IX. Based on the initial projections of incremental ad valorem tax revenue, it is estimated that approximately $20 million could be generated by the incremental increase in ad valorem tax revenue during the term of the Increment District. The initial projections of ad valorem Financing Revenue Sources are based upon an estimated $63 million initial total net capital investment, a 12.0% assessment rate on real property and a 15.0% assessment rate on personal property, and an approximately 0.11659% millage levy within the Increment District.

Based on the initial projections of incremental sales and use tax revenue, it is estimated that approximately $26.9 million could be generated by the incremental increase in sales and use tax revenue (from construction and retail sources) during the term of the Increment District, with approximately $1.7 million available for allocation to Project Costs, and approximately $25.2 million retained by the City. The initial projections of incremental sales and use tax revenue are based upon the projected revenues generated within the Increment District from the levy of an aggregate total of three and forty hundredths percent (3.40%) sales and use tax on new


15

construction within the Increment District and new retail and other space generating approximately $1.5 billion in gross taxable sales during the term of the Increment District.

The calculation of projected TIF Revenues will be refined based upon (i) the actual effective ad valorem tax rate and base assessed valuation, as determined from time to time by the Washington County Assessor and subject to change by voters of the applicable taxing jurisdictions at an election(s) held for such purpose, (ii) the total net capital investment resulting from development within the Increment District, (iii) the timing of the development; and (iv) the impact of the specific nature of the actual retail investment on projected sales per square foot.

The realization of the TIF Revenues is directly dependent on the City’s ability to attract development proposals on a magnitude necessary to fully develop the area within the Increment District during the term of the Increment District. The Silver Lake Village Project represents the initial efforts of the City, and the initial projections of TIF Revenues contained in this Project Plan are based solely on said initial projects. The anticipated development is more fully discussed in Exhibit “E”. Please see Exhibit “F” for a Preliminary Site Development Plan for the Silver Lake Village Project. The Authority and/or the City may enter into economic development agreements with the developers of any portion of the Project or any other parties as required by the Local Development Act.

Certain public improvements may be designed and/or constructed by the City. Authorized Project Costs, or the payment of debt service on TIF Bonds issued to pay Project Costs, will be paid from TIF Revenues by the City or the Authority, and may include (i) reimbursement of the City or the Authority for certain public improvements constructed from other available funds, and (ii) assistance in development financing (as authorized by the Local Development Act) to a third party developer for certain public infrastructure and/or other site improvements constructed on behalf of the City in furtherance of the purposes of this Project Plan. The financing of the projected private development in the area may be provided by private equity and private mortgage financing, secured by the private developments.

XII. PUBLIC REVENUE ESTIMATED TO ACCRUE FROM THE PROJECT AND OTHER ECONOMIC IMPACTS

The increase in ad valorem tax and sales and use tax revenues (estimated at a total of approximately $57.5 million over the term of the Increment District, and of which $15.0 million would be apportioned for Project Costs), of which portions will serve as the revenue source for financing the Project Costs authorized by Section IX of this Project Plan, are the public revenues directly attributable to the project defined by establishment of the Increment District. Based on the allocations of incremental tax revenue to Project Costs, over the approximately twenty-five (25) year duration of the Increment District, (i) the incremental ad valorem tax revenue is expected to total approximately $20 million, all of which would be apportioned for Project Costs; and (ii) the incremental sales and use tax revenue is expected to total approximately $26.9 million (from construction and retail sources), of which $1.7 million would be apportioned for Project Costs, $25.2 million retained by the City. Additionally, the various taxing jurisdictions


16

may realize additional ad valorem tax and sales and use tax revenues from any additional development outside the boundaries of the Increment District.

Construction of the improvements and subsequent development should have a considerable positive impact on total employment in the City’s metropolitan area, including temporary construction jobs and permanent positions in retail and other commercial establishments. The actual amount of jobs, payroll, and capital investment will be largely dependent on the specific commercial establishments that ultimately locate in the area. Indirect impacts (associated with the employment and income which result from the provision of inputs in support of the primary activity), and induced impacts (associated with the wages and jobs resulting from changes in household expenditures which come about through direct and indirect employment) will also result in additional growth in the City’s metropolitan area.

This Project Plan includes certain projections and estimates, which are based on the current expectations or beliefs of third party developer(s) and are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from the expectations contained herein due to changes in economic conditions, market demand and other factors affecting the development of the Project.

XIII. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC INVESTMENTS EXPECTED FOR THE PROJECT

The publicly financed Project Costs in the aggregate total amount of not to exceed $15,000,000.00 million, as authorized by this Project Plan, represent approximately 19% of the initial projected total public and private investment for the Project, which including anticipated expenditures by or on behalf of retail, commercial, or governmental entities locating within the Increment District, is expected to exceed $78 million. It is anticipated by the City that the total investment for the Project will greatly exceed said number when additional developments are identified and completed. Exhibit “E” contains a description of the initial projected developments in the Increment District.

XIV. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

The property within the Increment District is currently zoned a mixture of residential and commercial uses. The proposed Project conforms to the comprehensive plan for the City, as amended. No changes in the ordinances (other than minor zoning adjustments) of the City are contemplated under this Project Plan.


EXHIBIT “A”

MAP OF INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10

The proposed Increment District generally contains an area bordered on the north by the North Section Line of Section 8, Township 26 North, Range 13 East, on the east by the Half Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately 0.5 miles east of Silver Lake Road), on the west by the West Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately Silver Lake Road), and on the south by the Half Section Line of Section 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East. The approximate boundaries of the Increment District are shaded below. Please see Exhibit “B” for a legal boundary description of Increment District No. 10.


B-1

EXHIBIT “B”

INCREMENT DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION

INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10

An area located entirely in Washington County, Oklahoma, more particularly described as follows:

A TRACT OF LAND IN THE WEST HALF OF SECTIONS 8 AND 17, TOWNSHIP 26 NORTH, RANGE 13 EAST OF THE INDIAN MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

ALL OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 26 NORTH, RANGE 13 EAST OF THE INDIAN MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING TRACTS:

o THE EAST 100 FEET OF LOTS 1, 2, 3, AND 4, BLOCK 25, WOODLAND PARK 12TH ADDITION OR ANY PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER;

o ALL LAND, LOTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY PLATTED AS PART OF THE CROWNE POINT ADDITION; AND

o ALL OR ANY PORTION THEREOF OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 47, WOODLAND PARK 19TH ADDITION, WHICH ARE LOCATED WITHIN SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, TOGETHER WITH ANY ADJACENT PLATTED RIGHTS-OF-WAY;

o ALL OR ANY PORTION THEREOF OF LOTS 7, 8, AND 9, BLOCK 47, AMENDMENT TO WOODLAND PARK 19TH ADDITION, WHICH ARE LOCATED WITHIN SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER;

o ALL OR ANY PORTION THEREOF OF LOTS 10, 11, AND 12, BLOCK 47, WOODLAND PARK 21STADDITION, WHICH ARE LOCATED WITHIN SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER;

o CONTAINING 5,093,906.4 SQUARE FEET OR 116.94 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS;

AND

ALL OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 26 NORTH, RANGE 13 EAST OF THE INDIAN MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, EXCEPT THE NORTH 584.2 FEET OF THE EAST 850 FEET THEREOF, CONTAINING 6,473,030 SQUARE FEET OR 148.6 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS.


C-1

EXHIBIT “C”

MAP OF PROJECT AREA

The boundaries of the Project Area associated with Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville contains an area bordered on the north by the North Section Line of Section 8, Township 26 North, Range 13 East, on the east by the Half Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately 0.5 miles east of Silver Lake Road), on the west by the West Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately Silver Lake Road), and on the south by the Half Section Line of Section 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East. The approximate boundaries of the Project Area are shaded below. Please see Exhibit “D” for a legal boundary description of the Project Area.


D-1

EXHIBIT “D”

PROJECT AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION

INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10 PROJECT AREA










AND



E-1

EXHIBIT “E”

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE INCREMENT DISTRICT

This Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project (the “Project”) describes a mixed-use development that contemplates construction on a site of approximately 115 acres of over 200,000 square feet of new retail shopping centers (upon full build-out) and a $20 million high-quality market rate multi-family residential complex of 200 dwelling units in the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma (the “City”). The Project is expected to occur in as many as four phases for full development.

The proposed development will include several buildings and outparcels. A preliminary Site Development Plan is provided in Exhibit “F”.


F-1

EXHIBIT “F”

PRELIMINARY SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN* SILVER LAKE VILLAGE PROJECT

* Preliminary; Subject to Change

PURSUANT TO THE LEGAL NOTICE AS IS REQUIRED BY THE OKLAHOMA OPEN MEETING ACT INCLUDING THE POSTING OF NOTICE AND AGENDA AS IS REQUIRED BY THE TERMS THEREOF, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA, MET IN SPECIAL SESSION ON THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2016, AT 7:00 O’CLOCK P.M. PRESENT: ABSENT: (OTHER PROCEEDINGS) Thereupon, the following Ordinance was introduced and caused to be read by the City Clerk. Councilmember ___________ moved passage of the Ordinance and Councilmember __________ seconded the motion. The motion carrying with it the approval of said Ordinance was approved by the following vote: AYE: NAY: THEREUPON, Councilmember ____________ moved that an emergency be declared and that the Ordinance become effective immediately. Councilmember ___________ seconded the motion. The motion was adopted by the following vote: AYE: NAY: The Ordinance so approved is as follows:

[Ordinance No. _____ begins on following page]

2

ORDINANCE NO. _______

AN ORDINANCE APPROVING UTILIZATION OF APPORTIONED TAX REVENUES AUTHORIZED BY STATEWIDE VOTE ADOPTING ARTICLE 10, SECTION 6C OF THE OKLAHOMA CONSTITUTION AND IMPLEMENTED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, 62 O.S. §850, ET SEQ.; APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SILVER LAKE VILLAGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AND EXPRESSING INTENT TO CARRY OUT THE PROJECT PLAN; RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING THE ACTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THE BARTLESVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION; CREATING AND ESTABLISHING INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10, CITY OF BARTLESVILLE; DESIGNATING AND ADOPTING THE INCREMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND THE PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES; ADOPTING CERTAIN FINDINGS; RESERVING TO THE CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA, THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE MINOR AMENDMENTS TO THE PROJECT PLAN; AUTHORIZING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA TO CARRY OUT AND ADMINISTER THE PROJECT PLAN; ESTABLISHING A TAX APPORTIONMENT FUND; AUTHORIZING DIRECTIONS FOR PROSPECTIVE APPORTIONMENT OF TAX INCREMENTS; ESTABLISHING AN ALLOCATION OF USE FOR TAX INCREMENTS; DECLARING APPORTIONMENT FUNDS TO BE FUNDS OF THE CITY AND LIMITING THE PLEDGE OF APPORTIONED INCREMENTS TO INCREMENTS ACTUALLY APPORTIONED BY THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA, OR A PUBLIC TRUST DESIGNATED THEREBY, TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT PLAN UTILIZING APPORTIONED TAX INCREMENTS TO PAY OR REIMBURSE PROJECT COSTS DIRECTLY AND/OR TO ISSUE BONDS OR NOTES, IF FEASIBLE AND DESIRABLE, TO PAY PROJECT COSTS AND TO RETIRE SAID BONDS OR NOTES FROM APPORTIONED TAX INCREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY; AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO.

WHEREAS, by statewide vote, the people of the State of Oklahoma adopted Article 10, §6C as an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma to allow the Legislature to authorize cities, towns and counties to use local taxes for specific public investments, for assistance in development financing and as a revenue source for other public entities in the area, and to direct the apportionment of local taxes to plan, finance and carry out development of areas determined by the governing body of the city, town or county to be unproductive, undeveloped, underdeveloped or blighted; and

WHEREAS, the Legislature has enacted the Local Development Act, 62 Okla. Stat. §850, et seq. (the “Local Development Act”), for purpose of furthering the provisions of Article 10, §6C of the Oklahoma Constitution; and

3

WHEREAS, the Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project Plan (the “Project Plan”) supports the achievement of the economic development objectives of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma (the “City”) in accordance with previously approved strategies and plans to stimulate the construction of such commercial retail and multi-family residential structures to meet an unmet housing demand and provide enhanced retail shopping opportunities for residents of the City, support existing community development efforts to retain and expand employment in the area, attract major investment in the area, preserve and enhance the tax base and make possible investment, development, and economic growth that would be difficult or impossible without the project and the apportionment of ad valorem taxes and sales and use taxes from within the Increment District (as defined below); and

WHEREAS, the Project Plan calls for the creation of Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville (the “Increment District”); and

WHEREAS, the Bartlesville City Planning Commission (the “Planning Commission”) has adopted its Resolution (attached hereto as Exhibit “D”) declaring that the Project Plan is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City and recommending the approval of the Project Plan to the City Council of the City; and

WHEREAS, the Tax Increment District Review Committee (the “Review Committee”), comprised of individuals representing each of the taxing jurisdictions in which the proposed increment district is located, as well as the public at large, has considered the financial impacts of the proposed Project Plan on each such taxing jurisdiction and has found that the proposed project will have a positive financial impact on the affected taxing entities; and

WHEREAS, the Review Committee has reviewed the proposed Increment District in accordance with the criteria specified in the Local Development Act, and has found that the proposed Increment District is undeveloped within the meaning of Article 10, §6C of the Oklahoma Constitution and the Local Development Act, and is located in a reinvestment area (as defined in Section 853(17) of the Act) and is therefore eligible for assistance under the Local Development Act; and

WHEREAS, the Review Committee has found that approval of the Project Plan is appropriate and has recommended its approval to the City Council of the City, evidenced by its Resolution (attached hereto as Exhibit “E”); and

WHEREAS, tax apportionment financing is a necessary component in generating economic development in the proposed project area and the Increment District; and

WHEREAS, investment, development and economic growth will be difficult within the proposed project area and proposed Increment District, but possible if the Project Plan is adopted; and

WHEREAS, the Project Plan will use the tools provided by the Local Development Act only in an area where investment, development and economic growth would not otherwise occur, and

4

WHEREAS, the Project Plan provides tools that will supplement and not supplant or replace nominal public functions and services; and

WHEREAS, the establishment of the Increment District will be used in conjunction with existing programs and other locally implemented economic development efforts in order to encourage economic development in the proposed project area; and

WHEREAS, the boundaries of the Increment District do not dissect any similar area or create an unfair competitive advantage; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City recognizes the need for residential and neighborhood treatment as well as commercial/industrial development; and

WHEREAS, maximum effort has been made to allow full public knowledge and participation in the application of the Local Development Act in the review and approval of the Project Plan, including creation of the Increment District; and

WHEREAS, all required notices have been given and all required hearings have been held in connection with the proposed Project Plan, as prescribed in the Local Development Act, the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act, 25 Okla. Stat. §301 et seq., and other applicable law; and

WHEREAS, implementation of the Project Plan will be facilitated by designation of a public trust with the City as its beneficiary (referred to herein as the “Authority”), to assist the City in carrying out and administering the Project Plan and exercising all powers necessary thereto except those powers reserved by the City herein; and

WHEREAS, implementation of the Project Plan will be facilitated by reserving to the City the authority to make minor amendments to the Project Plan, as provided in the Local Development Act; and

WHEREAS, implementation of the Project Plan will be facilitated by authorizing the Authority to pay or reimburse authorized Project Costs pursuant to Section IX of the Project Plan from apportioned tax increments, and/or issue its tax apportionment notes or bonds (referred to herein as the “TIF Bonds”) payable from apportioned tax increments; and

WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City and its citizens to approve the Project Plan, including the establishment of the Increment District;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA:

Section 1. Utilization of Local Development Act. In order to undertake redevelopment of an undeveloped or underdeveloped area within the City, the City elects to utilize Article 10, §6C of the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma, adopted by statewide vote and implemented by the Local Development Act, which authorizes the use of local taxes for specific public investments, assistance in development financing and as a revenue source for other public entities in the area and which provides for the direction of apportionment of local taxes to plan,

5

finance, and carry out development of unproductive, undeveloped, underdeveloped, or blighted areas as determined by the governing body of a city, town, or county.

Section 2. Project Plan Approval. The Project Plan is hereby approved and adopted as recommended by the Planning Commission and the Review Committee; provided however, the person responsible for implementation of the Project Plan shall be the City Manager of the City or his designee. As used in this Ordinance, “Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project Plan” or “Project Plan” shall mean the document entitled “Silver Lake Village Economic Development Project Plan” dated March 16, 2016, and attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. It is the intent of the City to carry out the Project Plan as provided by this Ordinance.

Section 3. Ratification of Actions. All actions, findings and recommendations made or taken in connection with the Project Plan by the Planning Commission and the Review Committee are hereby ratified and confirmed, including, but not limited to, the designation and selection of representatives to the Review Committee from the taxing jurisdictions and the public at large, recommendations for approval, and the findings of conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, eligibility of the Increment District and financial impact upon the taxing jurisdictions.

Section 4. District Creation. The Increment District is hereby created as of the date of the adoption of this Ordinance. For identification purposes, the name of the Increment District shall be “Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville”.

Section 5. Increment District and Project Area Boundaries

Section 6. Findings. The City Council of the City hereby finds that:

. The boundaries of the Increment District and the Project Area (the area within which project activities will take place, including construction of the supporting public improvements) encompass an area generally described as an area bordered on the north by the North Section Line of Section 8, Township 26 North, Range 13 East, on the east by the Half Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately 0.5 miles east of Silver Lake Road), on the west by the West Section Line of Sections 8 and 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East (approximately Silver Lake Road), and on the south by the Half Section Line of Section 17, Township 26 North, Range 13 East, all within the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, and the specific Increment District legal description is hereby designated and adopted as described in Exhibit “B”. The specific Project Area legal description is hereby designated and adopted as described in Exhibit “C”.

(a) The Increment District is located within a reinvestment area as defined by the Local Development Act;

(b) The proposed improvements (as set forth in the Project Plan) within the Increment District are likely to enhance the value of other real property in the area and to promote the general public interest;

(c) The guidelines of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Section 852 of the Local Development Act shall be followed;

6

(d) The aggregate net assessed value of the taxable property in all increment districts within the City, as determined pursuant to Section 862 of the Local Development Act, does not exceed 35% of the total net assessed value of taxable property within the City;

(e) The aggregate net assessed value of the taxable property in all increment districts within the City, as determined pursuant to Section 862 of the Local Development Act, does not exceed 25% of the total assessed net value of any affected school districts located within the City;

(f) The land area of all increment districts within the City does not exceed 25% of the total land area of the City; and

(g) The Project Plan is feasible and conforms to the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended.

Section 7. Right to Amend Project Plan. The City reserves to itself the authority to make minor amendments to the Project Plan in accordance with the definition provided in Section 858(D) of the Local Development Act. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Review Committee may be reconvened at the direction of the City Council at any time following adoption of this Ordinance to consider and recommend any appropriate amendments to the Project Plan.

Section 8. City and Authority the Designated Public Entities. The City Council of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, is hereby designated and authorized as the public entity to carry out and administer the provisions of the Project Plan and to exercise all powers necessary or appropriate thereto, including, without limitation, those powers described in Section 854 of the Local Development Act. Upon designation by the City Council of the City, the Authority (as defined in the Project Plan) shall assist in carrying out and administering the provisions of the Project Plan and shall be authorized to exercise all powers necessary or appropriate thereto pursuant to Section 854 of the Local Development Act, except for approval of the Project Plan and those powers enumerated in paragraphs 1, 4, 7, and 16 of that section, which powers shall be reserved to the City Council of the City.

Section 9. Tax Apportionment Fund. There is hereby created a fund called the “Increment District No. 10, City of Bartlesville, Tax Apportionment Fund” (referred to herein as the “Apportionment Fund”), which fund will be held by and be the property of the City (except that such fund may also be held by the Authority or a trustee acting on behalf of the Authority). All monies apportioned pursuant to Section 10 shall be deposited in the Apportionment Fund.

Section 10. Apportionment of Tax Increments

(a) Ad Valorem Increment Revenues. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Development Act, one hundred percent (100%) of the increments of real and personal property ad valorem taxes generated within the Increment District, in excess of the real and personal property ad valorem taxes generated from the base assessed value of the Increment District, as such increments are determined and defined pursuant to the Local Development Act (i.e., the “Ad Valorem Increment Revenues”), are to be apportioned and set aside from all other ad valorem taxes levied within the Increment District, to be used exclusively for:

.

7

(i) the payment of principal, interest and premium, if any, on the TIF Bonds, issued pursuant to Section 863 of the Local Development Act;

(ii) to make payments, if required, to satisfy or replenish any reserve requirement established with respect to the TIF Bonds;

(iii) the payment of Project Costs incurred in connection with the development or construction of those projects listed in this Project Plan;

(iv) the reimbursement of a developer, including any interest component (pursuant to a development agreement with the City), the City, or any agency thereof (including the Authority), which has paid Project Costs from funds which were not increments derived from the Increment District, but only to the extent that such sums were actually paid; and

(v) to the extent necessary, the reimbursement to the City of any incremental sales tax revenues expended with respect to the TIF Bonds.

Pursuant to the Local Development Act, the Ad Valorem Increment Revenues apportioned hereunder and so collected shall be placed into the Apportionment Fund (such account being hereinafter referred to as the “Ad Valorem Tax Increment Revenue Account”) and shall be pledged as security for the payment of the TIF Bonds or otherwise used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs. No portion of such increments and no portion of the Apportionment Fund shall constitute a part of the general fund of the City.

The apportionment of ad valorem taxes pursuant to this section shall terminate upon the final payment of, or reimbursement for, all Project Costs incurred in connection with the projects listed in this Project Plan, and the payment of all outstanding principal, accrued interest, and premium due on the TIF Bonds; provided, however, that in no case shall the apportionment of revenues pursuant hereto extend beyond a period not to exceed approximately twenty-five (25) years (ending June 30, 2041, and referred to as the “Expiration Date”).

In the event that any portion of the principal of or interest on the TIF Bonds, issued in connection herewith, or any amount due and owing for reimbursement under a development agreement entered into by the City, remains unpaid as of the Expiration Date, then the Increment District shall not terminate until the increment apportioned during the term of the Increment District is actually received by the Apportionment Fund, even if the receipt of such revenues occurs subsequent to the Expiration Date.

(b) Sales Tax Increment Revenues. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Development Act, up to thirty percent (30%) of the incremental sales and use tax revenues derived from the Increment District, representing an aggregate total of 1.02% sales and use tax levied by the City pursuant to Chapter 18, Article II, Section 18-20 et seq., as such Code of Ordinances may be amended, replaced, extended, superseded, terminated, or otherwise modified from time to time, and generated within or sourced to the Increment District, as such increment is hereinafter determined and defined pursuant

8

to the Local Development Act (i.e., the “Sales Tax Increment Revenues” and collectively with the Ad Valorem Increment Revenues, the “TIF Revenues”), are to be apportioned and set aside from all other sales and use taxes levied within the Increment District, provided however, 50% of the incremental sales tax revenues shall be captured during the first twelve months of operation of a retail establishment located within the Increment District, 30% captured in the second 12 months and 10% captured in the third 12 months, to be used exclusively for:



(c) the payment of Project Costs incurred in connection with the development or construction of those projects listed in this Project Plan; and

(d) the reimbursement of a developer, including any interest component (pursuant to a development agreement with the City), the City, or any agency thereof (including the Authority), which has paid Project Costs from funds which were not increments derived from the Increment District, but only to the extent that such sums were actually paid.

Provided, it is the intent of the Ordinance to allow for the capture of up to 30% of the Sales Tax Increment Revenues generated within the Increment District to be pledged as additional security for the payment of any TIF Bonds issued to finance Project Costs contemplated within the Project Plan. It is currently expected that Ad Valorem Increment Revenues will provide sufficient revenue to finance the Project Costs and the Incremental Sales Tax Revenues will pass through to the City for authorized purposes on a monthly basis so long as they are not needed for debt service on any TIF Bonds; provided however, it is further the intent of the Project Plan to capture 50% of the incremental sales tax revenues during the first twelve months of operation of each retail establishment located within the Increment District, 30% captured in the second twelve months, and 10% captured in the third twelve months, which will be retained and used to accumulate a reserve for any TIF Bonds issued to finance Project Costs. In the event that any Sales Tax Increment Revenues are expended from the reserve, or are needed for the payment of principal and interest on any TIF Bonds, it is expected that those expenditures will be reimbursed from the collection of future Ad Valorem Increment Revenues. It is the intent of this Project Plan that any Sales Tax Increment Revenues collected within the Increment District will be returned to the City upon the completion of the objectives of the Project Plan.

Provided, however, the remaining unapportioned seventy percent (70%) of the incremental sales and use tax revenues derived from the Increment District, representing the equivalent of 2.38% of the total 3.40% sales and use tax levied by the City, shall be retained by the City and utilized for any lawful purpose consistent with the aforementioned Code of Ordinances. Provided further, that if said rate of sales and use

9

tax levied by the City shall increase or decrease pursuant to the Code of Ordinances, said percentages of allocation shall automatically be revised in a manner that will yield Sales Tax Increment Revenues equivalent to the proceeds of a 1.02% of the total 3.40% sales and use tax rate.

Provided, further, the increment of sales and use taxes upon which the Sales Tax Increment Revenues is calculated shall be reduced by the amount of sales tax revenues generated by any existing businesses (currently located within the City, but outside the boundaries of the Increment District) that cease operations at their existing location and relocate to within the Increment District (said reduction referred to herein as a “Transfer Adjustment”). Said amount of annual reduction shall be calculated based on the sales tax collections during the twelve month period prior to closing the previous location. For purposes of determining the incremental portion of the sales taxes generated within the District, the Mayor of the City shall certify as the “base sales tax amount” the annual sales taxes received by the City that were generated within or sourced to the area comprising the Increment District between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2015. If necessary for such certification, said base amount may be determined using reasonable estimates prepared by the City Clerk. All sales tax revenue generated within the Increment District and received by the City which are in excess of such base amount, net of any Transfer Adjustment, shall be considered to be the “increment” subject to apportionment by this section.

In addition to sales and use tax generated from retail sales, the Sales Tax Increment Revenues shall include all sales and use tax generated from actual construction occurring within the Increment District. The City shall to the extent necessary establish procedures related to the calculation and determination of construction related sales and use tax revenue qualifying as Sales Tax Increment Revenues. Such procedures shall stipulate that construction related Sales Tax Increment Revenues be derived only from new construction activities occurring within the Increment District. The City shall be entitled to rely on certifications of actual construction costs provided by a developer or related party in connection with determining any applicable Sales Tax Increment Revenues.

Pursuant to the Local Development Act, the Sales Tax Increment Revenues apportioned hereunder and so collected shall be placed into a separate account created within the Apportionment Fund (such account being hereinafter referred to as the “Sales Tax Increment Revenue Account”) and shall be pledged as security for the payment of the TIF Bonds or otherwise used to pay (or reimburse the payment of) Project Costs. No portion of such increments and no portion of the Apportionment Fund shall constitute a part of the general fund of the City.

The apportionment of sales and use taxes pursuant to this section shall terminate upon the final payment of, or reimbursement for, all Project Costs incurred in connection with the projects listed in this Project Plan, and the payment of all outstanding principal, accrued interest, and premium due on the TIF Bonds; provided, however, that in no case shall the apportionment of revenues pursuant hereto extend beyond the Expiration Date.

10

In the event that any portion of the principal of or interest on the TIF Bonds, issued in connection herewith, or any amount due and owing for reimbursement under a development agreement entered into by the City, remains unpaid as of the end of the Expiration Date, then the Increment District shall not terminate until the increment apportioned during the term of the Increment District is actually received by the Apportionment Fund, even if the receipt of such revenues occurs subsequent to the Expiration Date.

(c) Use of TIF Revenues. During the term of the Increment District, the TIF Revenues shall be utilized as follows:

(i) The payment of principal, accrued interest, and premium, if any, due on the TIF Bonds;

(ii) Transfer to any debt service reserve established in connection with the TIF Bonds in such amounts as may be necessary to restore the reserve to its prescribed levels;

(iii) All amounts remaining shall thereafter be utilized for (A) payment and/or reimbursement of authorized Project Costs (including any interest component pursuant to a development agreement); or (B) pre-payment of principal on the TIF Bonds until such time as all TIF Bonds are retired; and

(iv) Upon retirement of all TIF Bonds and payment of all Project Costs, (A) any remaining Ad Valorem Increment Revenues shall be transferred to the various ad valorem taxing jurisdictions, in the same percentages as originally collected, as determined by reference to the millage levied by each of the various ad valorem taxing jurisdictions for the related tax year, excluding sinking fund levies, and (B) any remaining Sales Tax Increment Revenues shall be transferred to the City for deposit into the General Fund or to the appropriate special fund, in each case consistent with the provisions of the Local Development Act.

Section 11. Increments Constitute City Funds; Uses. From and after apportionment, the apportioned increments shall constitute funds of the City (except that such funds may also be held by the Authority or a trustee acting on behalf of the Authority). Apportioned increments may be used for the payment of Project Costs; provided, however, the pledge of apportioned increments toward payment of such Project Costs shall be limited to increments actually apportioned by the City and any security instruments shall provide that except as provided for in this Ordinance, the City has no legal obligation or promise to apportion additional increments in future years. The City and the Authority shall have the authorization to carry out certain provisions of the Project Plan, as authorized in Section VIII of the Project Plan, to incur and pay or reimburse Project Costs pursuant to Section IX of the Project Plan and also, if feasible and desirable, to issue tax apportionment bonds or notes, incur the costs of issuance of such bonds, and accumulate appropriate reserves, if any, in connection with such bonds, and to retire said bonds or notes from apportioned tax increments.

11

Section 12. Severability

Section 13. Emergency. It is immediately necessary for the preservation of the public health, peace and safety of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, and the inhabitants thereof that the provisions of this Ordinance become operative immediately and therefore, an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately from and after its passage and approval.

. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional, such portion shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.

Section 14. Necessary Action. The Mayor or Vice Mayor and City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk be and hereby are authorized and empowered to execute and deliver for and on behalf of the City any and all other documents or instruments reasonably necessary to accomplish the implementation of the Project Plan.

[Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally]

12

PASSED AND APPROVED THIS 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2016. CITY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA (SEAL) ____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk

13

STATE OF OKLAHOMA ) )SS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of an excerpt from the minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City held on the date above stated, all as recorded in the official minutes of such meeting. I further certify that the “Open Meeting Law” was complied with for such meeting. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND THIS 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2016. (SEAL) ___________________________________ City Clerk

Exhibit A-1

EXHIBIT “A”

SILVER LAKE VILLAGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN

[On file with the City Clerk of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma]

Exhibit B-1

EXHIBIT “B”

INCREMENT DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION

INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10, CITY OF BARTLESVILLE










AND


Exhibit C-1

EXHIBIT “C”

PROJECT AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION

INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 10, CITY OF BARTLESVILLE PROJECT AREA










AND


Exhibit D-1

EXHIBIT “D”

RESOLUTION OF THE BARTLESVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

Resolution dated March 22, 2016

[Copy on file with the City Clerk of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma]

Exhibit E-1

EXHIBIT “E”

RESOLUTION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REVIEW COMMITTEE

Resolution dated March 16, 2016

[Copy on file with the City Clerk of the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma]

ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE

MEMORANDUM

TO: Ed Gordon, City Manager

FROM: Mike Bailey, Administrative Director/CFO

SUBJECT: Presentation and discussion on utility rates and the related Leidos utility rate study.

GENERAL INFORMATION:

With the FY 2014 budget, the City Council authorized a study to examine the sufficiency of the City’s utility rates and make recommendations on the appropriate levels, allocation, and structure of our rates. In August 2014, Dave Yanke of Leidos presented the results to the City Council (his presentation is attached), and the City of Bartlesville received the completed report from Leidos (the full report is also attached following the presentation mentioned above). The report made a number of recommendations relating to rate structures and levels.

Rate changes are typically effective the first day of the next fiscal year (July 1). Staff and Council elected not to take action on any rate changes for the current fiscal year, and instead elected to spend more time analyzing some of the underlying assumptions. However, it is now time to consider the study’s recommendations and take action prior to the next fiscal year’s budget.

The recommendations from this report have been further studied by Staff and the capital scenarios further examined. Staff will make a presentation of the results of the study and Staff’s recommendations at the April 18, 2016 Council meeting. Staff is not requesting that any action be taken that night. Instead, this item will be brought back for action at a later date. Any rate increases that are adopted at that time will take effect on July 1, 2016.

Please schedule this for presentation at the April 18, 2016 City Council meeting.

COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

None

leidos.com/engineering

Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study City of Bartlesville

Presented by: Mr. Dave Yanke and Mr. Andy Baker

August 18, 2014

2 © Leidos. All rights reserved. leidos.com/engineering

Agenda

› Purpose of Study

› Description of System and Challenges

› Rate Study Approach

› Revenue Requirement

› Status Quo

› Rate Design

› Policy Issues


Purpose of Study

› Develop a 5-year Financial Forecast

› Develop Water and Wastewater Rates

› Identify and Address Policy Issues


Description of Water System & Challenges

› Water Supply › Hulah Lake

› Treatment

› Storage

› Transmission & Distribution

Challenges

› Drought Management

› Funding Levels


Description of Wastewater System & Challenges

› Collection System

› Treatment Plant

Challenges

› Aging collection system

› Insufficient treatment capacity at existing plant

› ODEQ Consent Order


Rate Study Approach

Revenue

Requirement

Cost of Service

Analysis

Rate

Design

Are Rates

Okay?

How Much Revenue is Needed?

Allocate Costs to Customer Classes & Service Areas

How to Equitably Collect From Customers

Y

N


Revenue Requirement

Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Debt Service

Cash Capital Outlays

Gross Revenue Requirement

Less: (Revenue Offsets)

Net Revenue Requirement 1

1. Retail and wholesale rates need to recover this cost.


Water & Wastewater Revenue Requirement Forecast

In Thousands of Dollars

Test Year FY 2014

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 2 FY 2016

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 4 FY 2018

Year 5 FY 2019

Base Scenario Water Utility $10,164 $10,429 $10,620 $10,770 $10,923 $11,090

Wastewater Utility $5,560 $5,600 $5,271 $5,348 $5,427 $5,508

$15,724 $16,029 $15,891 $16,118 $16,350 $16,599

Scenario 1: WW Reuse & New WWTP

Water Utility1 $10,214 $10,479 $10,670 $11,006 $11,160 $11,327

Wastewater Utility2 $6,240 $6,280 $5,951 $6,028 $6,107 $8,000

$16,454 $16,759 $16,621 $17,034 $17,267 $19,327

Scenario 2: WW Reuse, Copan Raw Water Line, New WWTP

Water Utility3 $10,214 $10,479 $10,670 $11,119 $12,270 $12,438


$16,454 $16,759 $16,621 $17,147 $18,377 $20,438


Water Revenue Requirement, Test Year

Water Plant, $2.7 M

Water Admin, $0.3 M

Water Distribution,

$3.1 M

Debt Service, $3.5 M

Cash-Funded CIP, $1.4 M


Wastewater Revenue Requirement, Test Year

Wastewater Plant, $2.1 M

Wastewater Maintenance,

$1.9 M

Debt Service, $0.03 M

Cash-Funded CIP, $1.4 M


Current Water Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL 5/8” or ¾” $12.19

1” 21.73

1.5” 33.60

2” 47.35

3” 72.66

4” 135.16

6” 256.88

8” 485.39

VOLUMETRIC Monthly Consumption Rate per

(gallons) 1,000 gallons

0-2,000 $0.002

2,001-100,000 3.33

100k-500k 3.18

>500k 2.94 1 Rates for In-City customers. The volumetric rate for Out-of-City customers

is 175% of In-City customers. 2 First tier (0-2,000 gallons) included in monthly minimum bill.


Proposed Water Rates – Minimum Bill

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 5 FY 2019

Scenario 1: Base Case PLUS WW Reuse Project Meter Size (inches)

5/8” $12.19 $12.74 $13.91 $15.19

1” $21.73 $31.85 $34.78 $37.98

1 1/2” $33.60 $63.70 $69.55 $75.95

2” $47.35 $101.92 $111.28 $121.52

3” $72.66 $191.10 $208.65 $227.85

4” $135.16 $318.50 $347.75 $379.75

6” $256.88 $637.00 $695.50 $759.50

8” $485.39 $1,019.20 $1,112.80 $1,215.20

Scenario 2: Scenario 1 PLUS Copan Raw Water Line

Meter Size (inches) 5/8” $12.19 $13.35 $16.01 $19.20

1” $21.73 $33.38 $40.03 $48.00

1 1/2” $33.60 $66.75 $80.05 $96.00

2” $47.35 $106.80 $128.08 $153.60

3” $72.66 $200.25 $240.15 $288.00

4” $135.16 $333.75 $400.25 $480.00

6” $256.88 $667.50 $800.50 $960.00

8” $485.39 $1,068.00 $1,280.80 $1,536.00


Proposed Water Rates – Volumetric Rate

> Conservation-oriented rate structure. Why? > Promotes responsible use of a limited resource

> May reduce City’s reliance on expensive new water sources


Proposed Water Rates –Volumetric Rate – Scenario 1

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 5 FY 2019

In-City Meters <3-Inches 0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $3.33 $3.45 $3.84 $4.27

10,001-25,000 gal $3.33 $3.80 $4.22 $4.70

25,001-50,000 gal $3.33 $4.14 $4.61 $5.12

>50,000 gal $3.33 $4.49 $4.99 $5.55

Meters ≥3-Inches $3.33 $3.45 $3.84 $4.27

Outside City Meters <3-Inches 0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83

10,001-25,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.88

25,001-50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $6.40

>50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $6.24 $6.94

Meters ≥3-Inches $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83


Proposed Water Rates –Volumetric Rate – Scenario 2

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 5 FY 2019

In-City Meters <3-Inches 0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $3.33 $3.45 $3.88 $4.36

10,001-25,000 gal $3.33 $3.80 $4.27 $4.80

25,001-50,000 gal $3.33 $4.14 $4.66 $5.23

>50,000 gal $3.33 $4.49 $5.04 $5.67

Meters ≥3-Inches $3.33 $3.45 $3.88 $4.36

Outside City Meters <3-Inches 0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83

10,001-25,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $6.00

25,001-50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $6.54

>50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $6.30 $7.09

Meters ≥3-Inches $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83


Proposed Water Rates – Water Capital Investment Fee

> Created to collect revenue to meet City’s cash-funded capital needs

> Proposed: creating a water capital investment fee, conceptually similar to the wastewater capital investment fee

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 2 FY 2016

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 4 FY 2018

Year 5 FY 2019

Capital Invest Fee per 1,000 gallons

n/a $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85


$0.00

$10.00

$20.00

$30.00

$40.00

$50.00

$60.00

Water Typical Bill Comparison

Based on 7,500 gallons water usage per month


Average Residential Water Bills – Historical Context

$25.00

$30.00

$35.00

$40.00

$45.00

$50.00

$55.00FY

200

6

FY 2

007

FY 2

008

FY 2

009

FY 2

010

FY 2

011

FY 2

012

FY 2

013

FY 2

014

FY 2

015

FY 2

016

FY 2

017

FY 2

018

FY 2

019

Scenario 2 - 2.7% per year equivalent


Base- 2.3% per year equivalent


Current Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1

Monthly Minimum Bill $2.93

Volumetric Rate2 $3.04

Capital Invest Fee2 $1.25 1 Rates are the same for both In-City and Out-of-City

customers. 2 Rate per 1,000 gallons.


Proposed Wastewater Rates – Minimum Bill

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 2 FY 2016

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 4 FY 2018

Year 5 FY 2019

Base Scenario Minimum Monthly Bill

$2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93

Scenario 1 Minimum Monthly Bill

$2.93 $4.33 $5.73 $7.13 $8.53 $9.93


Proposed Wastewater Rates – Volumetric Rate

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 2 FY 2016

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 4 FY 2018

Year 5 FY 2019

All Scenarios Volumetric rate per 1,000 gallons

$3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29


Proposed Wastewater Rates – Wastewater Capital Investment Fee

> Created to collect revenue to meet City’s cash-funded capital needs

Current Rates

Year 1 FY 2015

Year 2 FY 2016

Year 3 FY 2017

Year 4 FY 2018

Year 5 FY 2019

Base Scenario Capital Invest Fee per 1,000 gallons

$1.25 $1.28 $1.31 $1.34 $1.37 $1.40

Scenario 1 Capital Invest Fee per 1,000 gallons

$1.25 $1.44 $1.66 $1.91 $2.20 $2.53


Wastewater Typical Bill Comparison

$0.00

$5.00

$10.00

$15.00

$20.00

$25.00

$30.00

$35.00

$40.00

$45.00

Based on 7,500 gallons water usage per month


Policy Issues

> Water Rate Structure

> Wholesale Rates

> Septic Fee Surcharge

> Copan Water Rights


Questions?


Point of Contact

Dave Yanke DIRECTOR 3409 Executive Center Drive Suite 128 Austin, TX 78731

512.649.1254

[email protected]

Andy Baker PROJECT MANAGER 999 Third Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98104

206.695.4486 555.555.5555

[email protected]



Final Report

Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma

August 2014

This report has been prepared for the use of the client for the specific purposes identified in the report. The conclusions, observations and recommendations contained herein attributed to Leidos constitute the opinions of Leidos. To the extent that statements, information and opinions provided by the client or others have been used in the preparation of this report, Leidos has relied upon the same to be accurate, and for which no assurances are intended and no representations or warranties are made. Leidos makes no certification and gives no assurances except as explicitly set forth in this report.

© 2014 Leidos, Inc. All rights reserved.

August 20, 2014

5806 Mesa Drive, Ste 310 / Austin, TX 78731 / 512.450.0991 / leidos.com/engineering

Mr. Mike Bailey Administrative Director/CFO City of Bartlesville 401 S. Johnstone Avenue Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74003 Subject: Water and Wastewater Cost of Service Analysis – Final Report Dear Mr. Bailey:

Leidos and NewGen (a subcontractor) are pleased to submit the enclosed report to the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma detailing the analysis and conclusions resulting from the Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study conducted for the City. The study equitably distributes costs between the water and wastewater customers to ensure the rate structures are fair and equitable to all customer classes. The rates are designed to recover all costs associated with operations and maintenance, debt service, and cash capital outlays. Further, the rates are projected to generate the necessary revenue to ensure the financial integrity of the utility.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide our professional services to the City of Bartlesville and would like to express our sincere appreciation to you and your staff for supplying the needed information and data. Should you or City Council members require additional information or clarification regarding the Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Dave Yanke at (512) 773-5494 or Mr. Andy Baker at (206) 227-5378.

Sincerely,

Leidos Engineering, LLC NewGen Strategies & Solutions, LLC Andy Baker Dave Yanke

This Page Left Blank for Two-Sided Printing

File: 153242/306261

Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study

City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma

Table of Contents

Letter of Transmittal

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

Executive Summary

Section 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1-1 Current Operations ............................................................................................ 1-1 Current Retail Rates .......................................................................................... 1-1

Water ...................................................................................................... 1-1 Wastewater ............................................................................................... 1-2

Section 2 REVENUE REQUIREMENT ................................................................. 2-1 Revenue Requirement Methodology ................................................................. 2-1

Test Year Adjustments ............................................................................. 2-1 Inflation Factors ....................................................................................... 2-2

Growth Assumptions ............................................................................... 2-2 Capital Spending Scenarios ..................................................................... 2-2

Revenue Requirement Forecast ......................................................................... 2-4

Section 3 RATES ....................................................................................................... 3-1 Revenue Recovery from Current Rates ............................................................. 3-1 Retail Rates ........................................................................................................ 3-2

Water Rates .............................................................................................. 3-2

Wastewater Rates ..................................................................................... 3-7 Monitor Water Consumption and Financial Conditions ................................. 3-10

Section 4 BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS ............................................................. 4-1 Current Rates ..................................................................................................... 4-1

Stillwater .................................................................................................. 4-1 Broken Arrow .......................................................................................... 4-3 Edmond .................................................................................................... 4-4

Moore ...................................................................................................... 4-6 Muskogee ................................................................................................. 4-7 Shawnee ................................................................................................... 4-8

Average Bill Comparison ................................................................................ 4-10

Table of Contents

ii Leidos, Inc. City of Bartlesville Water & Wastewater Rate Study Report - Final Report.docx 8/20/14

Section 5 POLICY ISSUES ...................................................................................... 5-1 Change to Inclining Block Rate Structure ......................................................... 5-1 Wholesale Rates ................................................................................................ 5-1 Increases to Wastewater Minimum Monthly Bill ............................................. 5-2 Septic Fee Surcharge ......................................................................................... 5-2 Copan Lake Water Rights ................................................................................. 5-2

Appendix List of Schedules Schedule 1 .............................................................................................. Water Test Year Schedule 2 ...................................................... Water Revenue Requirement – Base Case Schedule 3 ................................................................. Water Example Rates – Base Case Schedule 4 ..................................................... Water Revenue Requirement – Scenario 1 Schedule 5 ................................................................. Water Example Rates – Scenario 1 Schedule 6 ..................................................... Water Revenue Requirement – Scenario 2 Schedule 7 ................................................................. Water Example Rates – Scenario 2 Schedule 8 ..................................................................................... Wastewater Test Year Schedule 9 ............................................. Wastewater Revenue Requirement – Base Case Schedule 10 ...................................................... Wastewater Example Rates – Base Case Schedule 11 .......................................... Wastewater Revenue Requirement – Scenario 1 Schedule 12 ...................................................... Wastewater Example Rates – Scenario 1

Table of Contents

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. iii

List of Tables Table 1–1 Current Retail Water Rates ........................................................................ 1-2 Table 1–2 Current Retail Wastewater Rates ............................................................... 1-3 Table 2–1 Capital Scenarios ....................................................................................... 2-4 Table 2–2 Revenue Requirement Scenarios ............................................................... 2-5 Table 3–1 Revenue Recovery from Current Rates Under Base Case Scenario .......... 3-1 Table 3–2 Water Monthly Minimum Bill ................................................................... 3-3 Table 3–3 Base Scenario – Volumetric Rates (per 1,000 gallons) ............................. 3-5 Table 3–4 Scenario 1 – Volumetric Rates (per 1,000 gallons) ................................... 3-6 Table 3–5 Scenario 2 – Volumetric Rates (per 1,000 gallons) ................................... 3-7 Table 3–6 Projected Water Revenue Recovery .......................................................... 3-8 Table 3–7 Wastewater Minimum Monthly Bill .......................................................... 3-9

Table 3–8 Wastewater Capital Investment Fee ........................................................... 3-9 Table 3–9 Wastewater Volumetric Rate ................................................................... 3-10 Table 3–10 Projected Wastewater Revenue Recovery ............................................. 3-10 Table 3–11 Water Consumption Elasticity ............................................................... 3-11 Table 4–1 City of Stillwater Current Retail Water Rates ........................................... 4-2 Table 4–2 City of Stillwater Current Retail Wastewater Rates .................................. 4-2 Table 4–3 City of Broken Arrow Current Retail Water Rates .................................... 4-3 Table 4–4 City of Broken Arrow Current Retail Wastewater Rates ........................... 4-4 Table 4–5 City of Edmond Current Retail Water Rates ............................................. 4-5 Table 4–6 City of Edmond Current Retail Wastewater Rates .................................... 4-5 Table 4–7 City of Moore Current Retail Water Rates ................................................ 4-6 Table 4–8 City of Moore Current Retail Wastewater Rates ....................................... 4-6 Table 4–9 City of Muskogee Current Retail Water Rates .......................................... 4-7

Table 4–10 City of Muskogee Current Retail Wastewater Rates ............................... 4-8 Table 4–11 City of Shawnee Current Retail Water Rates ........................................... 4-9 Table 4–12 City of Shawnee Current Retail Wastewater Rates ............................... 4-10 Table 4–13 Typical Monthly Water Bill Comparison .............................................. 4-11 Table 4–14 Typical Monthly Wastewater Bill Comparison ..................................... 4-11

Table of Contents

iv Leidos, Inc. City of Bartlesville Water & Wastewater Rate Study Report - Final Report.docx 8/20/14

List of Figures Figure 1 Average Monthly Bill and Annualized Increase Since 2006 ..................... 4-12

File: 153242/306261

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma retained Leidos Engineering, LLC to conduct a Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study. The purpose of the Study was to determine the total cost of providing water and wastewater services, to equitably distribute the cost to customers, and to design rates to ensure the financial integrity of the Water and Wastewater Utilities.

Major Considerations Two major factors that were addressed as part of this study were the evaluation of funding scenarios for major capital spending for both Water and Wastewater facilities, and the evaluation and proposal of a shift in the rate structure of the water rates, from a declining block structure to an inclining block structure. Three major facilities have been identified in the City’s capital planning: a new wastewater treatment plant, planned to mitigate chronic overflows due to insufficient treatment capacity; a wastewater effluent reuse project; and a raw water line to Copan Lake, adding source capacity to improve the Water Utility’s resilience during drought conditions. In addition to these major capital projects, which it intends to fund via debt issuance through the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, the City has ongoing repairs and replacements which it funds on a pay-as-you-go basis. Leidos analyzed several capital spending scenarios to illustrate the incremental impact of these projects on the revenue requirement and rates. Scenarios evaluated include:

Base Scenario – This scenario included approximately $1.4 million in water and $1.4 million in wastewater cash-funded capital outlays to be funded annually through water and wastewater rates, in addition to the existing operations and maintenance and debt service obligations of the Utilities.

Scenario 1 – Base Scenario PLUS Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Reuse

Scenario 2 – Scenario 1 PLUS Copan Raw Water Line and Surface Water Rights

The capital spending associated with each of these scenarios is discussed further in Section 2 of this report.

Revenue Requirement Forecast A revenue requirement is defined as the amount of revenue that is required to recover all costs associated with the operations and maintenance, debt service, and cash capital outlays. Section 2 of this report provides a discussion on the development of the revenue requirement. Table ES-1 shows the revenue requirement for the Water and Wastewater Utilities for the five-year financial forecast period.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES-2 Leidos, Inc. City of Bartlesville Water & Wastewater Rate Study Report - Final Report.docx 8/20/14

Table ES-1 Revenue Requirement Scenarios


Test Year

FY 2014

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Water Utility $10,164 $10,429 $10,620 $10,770 $10,923 $11,090


$15,724 $16,029 $15,891 $16,118 $16,350 $16,599

Annual Change 1.9% -0.9% 1.4% 1.4% 1.5%


Water Utility1 $10,214 $10,479 $10,670 $11,006 $11,160 $11,327


$16,454 $16,759 $16,621 $17,034 $17,267 $19,327

Annual Change 1.9% -0.8% 2.5% 1.4% 11.9%


Water Utility3 $10,214 $10,479 $10,670 $11,119 $12,270 $12,438


$16,454 $16,759 $16,621 $17,147 $18,377 $20,438

Annual Change 1.9% -0.8% 3.2% 7.2% 11.2%

1 Difference is due to higher cash-funded capital, and new debt service starting in FY 2017. 2 Difference is due to higher cash-funded capital, and new debt service starting in FY 2019. 3 Difference is due to additional debt service starting in FY 2018 and increased O&M expenditures for Water Rights.

Water and Wastewater Rates The current rates for water and wastewater are projected to under-recover the total revenue requirement starting in FY 2015, due partially to the level of capital spending necessary to meet the City’s regulatory obligations and customer demand, and partly because the City has not raised its water rates since FY 2006. The Operating Reserve may be utilized to compensate for the revenue shortfall, but eventually rates will need to be adjusted.

For customers with water meters 2-inches in diameter and smaller, all three water rate scenarios reflect a change from a “declining” block rate structure to an “inclining” block rate structure. This change is made because water is a limited resource, and with the intention of promoting water conservation. Under this “inclining” block rate structure customers pay a higher rate per 1,000 gallons when they increase their consumption.

The retail water rates include a new water capital investment fee, intended to function similarly to the City’s existing wastewater capital investment fee. The new fee would be established on a volumetric basis (flat rate per 1,000 gallons), and would be intended to collect revenue to fund the cash-funded (i.e. pay-as-you-go) water-related

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

File: 153242/306261 Leidos Engineering, LLC ES-3

capital projects. In all three scenarios the water capital investment fee is forecast at $0.85 per 1,000 gallons.

Tables ES-2 and ES-3 provide the rates associated with Scenario 1 for both Water and Wastewater.1 Rates for all scenarios evaluated are provided in Section 3 of this report. The rates are then compared with current rates in six similar communities in Section 4 of this report. Various policy issues are discussed in Section 5 of this report, with corresponding recommendations by Leidos, where appropriate.

Table ES-2 Scenario 1 - Monthly Minimum Bills1

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

WATER

Meter Size (inches)

5/8” $12.19 $12.74 $13.31 $13.91 $14.54 $15.19

1” $21.73 $31.85 $33.28 $34.78 $36.35 $37.98

1 1/2” $33.60 $63.70 $66.55 $69.55 $72.70 $75.95

2” $47.35 $101.92 $106.48 $111.28 $116.32 $121.52

3” $72.66 $191.10 $199.65 $208.65 $218.10 $227.85

4” $135.16 $318.50 $332.75 $347.75 $363.50 $379.75

6” $256.88 $637.00 $665.50 $695.50 $727.00 $759.50

8” $485.39 $1,019.20 $1,064.80 $1,112.80 $1,163.20 $1,215.20

WASTEWATER

All Customers $2.93 $4.33 $5.73 $7.13 $8.53 $9.93

1 Outside City Limits minimum bills are equal to 125% of Inside City rate.

1 Annual cash capital outlays of $1.4 million for water infrastructure, $2.1 million for wastewater infrastructure; and the new wastewater treatment plant and the wastewater reuse project.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES-4 Leidos, Inc. City of Bartlesville Water & Wastewater Rate Study Report - Final Report.docx 8/20/14

Table ES-3 Scenario 1 – Volumetric Rates and Capital Investment Fees1 (per 1,000 gallons)

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

WATER

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $3.33 $3.45 $3.64 $3.84 $4.05 $4.27

10,001-25,000 gal $3.33 $3.80 $4.00 $4.22 $4.46 $4.70

25,001-50,000 gal $3.33 $4.14 $4.37 $4.61 $4.86 $5.12

>50,000 gal $3.332 $4.49 $4.73 $4.99 $5.27 $5.55

Meters ≥3-Inches $3.332 $3.45 $3.64 $3.84 $4.05 $4.27

Water Capital Investment Fee

n/a $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85

WASTEWATER

All Customers $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Wastewater Capital Investment Fee

$1.25 $1.44 $1.66 $1.91 $2.20 $2.53

1 Outside City Limits volumetric rates equal to 125% of Inside City rate, or the current Outside City Limits rates, whichever is higher. The Water and Wastewater Capital Investment Fee does not include a 1.25 multiplier for Outside City Limits customers.

2 See Table 1-1 for Current Rate tiers.

.

File: 153242/306261

Section 1 INTRODUCTION

In March 2014, the City of Bartlesville, Oklahoma (City) retained Leidos Engineering, LLC (Leidos) to conduct a Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and Rate Design Study (Study). The purpose of the Study was to determine the total cost of providing water and wastewater services, to equitably distribute the cost to customers, and to design rates to ensure the financial integrity of the Water and Wastewater Utilities (Utilities). The total cost of providing water and wastewater services includes costs associated with operations and maintenance, debt service, and cash capital outlays. This includes capital improvements, inter-fund (e.g. General Fund) transfers, and reserve and coverage ratio requirements. This report provides a discussion of the methodology utilized to conduct the Study, the cost of providing services as determined by the Study, and rates for retail water and wastewater services.

Current Operations The City’s population is estimated to be approximately 35,900 in 2012 and is projected by the Oklahoma Department of Commerce to be 36,240 in 2025, an effective growth rate of less than one tenth of one percent. The Utilities currently have approximately 16,250 water connections and 15,400 wastewater connections both within and outside of the City Limits, in addition to contract (wholesale) customers.

The City receives raw water from Hulah Lake (owned by the U.S. Corps of Engineers), Hudson Lake (owned by the City), and Caney River. The City owns and operates a surface water treatment plant, constructed in 2006, with a capacity of 26 million gallons per day (MGD). For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, the City delivered approximately 2.4 billion gallons of treated water. The City also owns a wastewater treatment plant, operated by Veolia, with a capacity of approximately 7 MGD, which discharges to the Caney River.

Current Retail Rates The City has the following rates in place for retail water and wastewater customers. These rates were effective as of June 30, 2013. In addition to the rates listed in this section, there are other miscellaneous fees related to the Utilities, such as tap fees, connect fees, disconnect fees, locate fees, and septic tank disposal fees. These fees are discussed further in Section 5 of this report.

Water

The City’s current water rate structure includes a monthly minimum bill component (a meter charge that is based on the customer’s meter size, and the first 2,000 gallons per month) and a volumetric rate charged per 1,000 gallons. The minimum bill may also be referred to as a “service charge”. The volumetric rates are characterized as a

Section 1

1-2 Leidos, Inc. City of Bartlesville Water & Wastewater Rate Study Report - Final Report.docx

declining block rate structure, meaning the more water consumed, the lower the rate charged per 1,000 gallons. The current water rates are summarized in Table 1–1.

Table 1–1 Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL

5/8” or ¾” $12.19

1” 21.73

1.5” 33.60

2” 47.35

3” 72.66

4” 135.16

6” 256.88

8” 485.39

VOLUMETRIC

Monthly Consumption Rate per

(gallons) 1,000 gallons

0-2,000 $0.002

2,001-100,000 3.33

100k-500k 3.18

>500k 2.94 1 Rates for In-City customers. The volumetric rate for

Out-of-City customers is 175% of In-City customers. 2 First tier (0-2,000 gallons) included in monthly

minimum bill.

Wastewater

The City’s current wastewater rate structure includes a monthly minimum bill component, a volumetric rate charged per 1,000 gallons, and a Sewer Capital Investment Fee charged per 1,000 gallons. The volumetric charge and capital investment fee are based on a winter average for all customers except industrial customers, who are billed based on actual water use. The current wastewater rates are summarized in Table 1–2.

INTRODUCTION

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 1-3

Table 1–2 Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL $2.93

VOLUMETRIC2 $3.04

CAPITAL INVEST FEE2 $1.25 1 Rates are the same for both In-City and Out-of-City

customers. 2 Rate per 1,000 gallons.

Winter Average and Volumetric Charge Calculation

Wastewater bills during the winter months (December, January, February, and March) are based on the billed water use in those months. For the remaining eight months of the year, the volumetric charge is based on the lowest of:

a) The actual water metered for the same period; or

b) 1.2 times the average water consumption for the lowest three bills from the four winter months. An exception is made if the actual consumption in any of those months is lower than 2,000 gallons, in which case 2,000 gallons is used for computing the average. For new residents where no average for the customer is available, the average is assumed to be 7,000 gallons.

File: 153242/306261

Section 2 REVENUE REQUIREMENT

Section 2 of this report describes the methodology utilized to develop the revenue requirement for the Utilities. A revenue requirement is defined as the amount of revenue that is required to recover all costs associated with operations and maintenance, debt service, and cash capital outlays. The revenue requirement developed for the Study is related to retail customer rates and, therefore, is net of revenue generated by miscellaneous fees and charges. These other revenue sources are referred to as revenue offsets.2

Revenue Requirement Methodology A historical period of two fiscal years was reviewed during the Study for the purpose of estimating the future operating and capital costs for the Utilities. Leidos compared the FY 2014 Budget with the Actuals for FY 2012 and FY 2013. Based on this comparison, the FY 2014 Budget provides a reasonable estimate of the expenses associated with the operation of the Utilities. Leidos made various adjustments to the FY 2014 Budget in order to establish a “Test Year” for the five-year financial forecast. A Test Year is a common term in rate studies that refers to an adjusted fiscal year budget that is used as a basis for setting rates. The Test Year should be representative of “typical” conditions, with adjustments made for any unusual or one-time expenses. Further, any projected non-recurring expenses or revenues are identified and incorporated into the financial forecast.

Test Year Adjustments

The FY 2014 Budget, adjustments, and resulting Test Year are shown in the Appendix, Schedules 1 and 8. The key adjustments to the FY 2014 Budget in developing the Test Year are:

Capital – Capital improvements included in the FY 2014 Budget were adjusted to reflect the average of the City’s capital improvement plan that is cash funded over the five-year study period ($1.389 million per year for Water, $1.423 million per year for Wastewater).

Professional Services – The sum of Professional Services line items in the FY 2014 Budget was greater than in any of the prior years and, per City staff, was determined to be atypical. Therefore, all Professional Services line items were adjusted to the FY 2013 levels.

Machinery and Equipment – Machinery and Equipment spending in FY 2013 and FY 2014 Budget were identified as atypical by City staff. Therefore, all Machinery and Equipment line items were adjusted to FY 2012 levels.

2 Appendix, Schedules 1 and 8 provide a detailed listing of all revenue offsets.

Section 2


Inflation Factors

The Test Year revenue requirement was used as the basis for the 5-year financial forecast. Certain expenses were projected based on contractual terms and debt service schedules. However, the majority of expenses were operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, which were inflated based on the following assumptions:

Insurance increase at 7.0 percent per year3

All other O&M expenses increase at 2.3 percent per year4

Growth Assumptions

The most recent customer counts and consumption data were used as a basis for the five year financial forecast. Based on the Oklahoma Department of Commerce’s projection of minimal growth, an assumption of no change in customer counts or volumetric consumption was assumed, per City staff. This applies to the forecasts for both the Water and Wastewater Utilities.

Capital Spending Scenarios

In order to continue serving its current and future customers, the City has identified three major capital projects. These are critical assets for the sustainable operation of the Utilities, and in some cases may be necessary to comply with state and/or federal regulatory standards. Leidos worked closely with City staff to develop three scenarios for capital spending. The projects and scenarios are discussed below.

Wastewater Treatment Plant – The City plans to construct a new wastewater treatment plant with an estimated capacity of 4.5 MGD at an estimated cost of $35 million. The wastewater system currently suffers from chronic overflows due to insufficient treatment capacity. Design will be completed in FY 2017, with construction scheduled to begin in FY 2019.

Wastewater Effluent Reuse – The City plans to relocate the existing wastewater treatment plant discharge location approximately five miles upstream to enable reuse of wastewater effluent. The project is estimated to have a construction cost of approximately $3.5 million. Engineering design is scheduled for FY 2015, with construction scheduled to begin in FY 2017. Because this project provides a dependable water source, it is classified as a Water cost, rather than Wastewater.

Copan Lake Raw Water Line – The City is currently negotiating for water rights on the U.S. Corps of Engineers-owned Copan Lake for additional water rights. If secured, a new raw water line will be required to transport raw water from Copan to the City’s water treatment plant. The City estimates that the pipeline will cost approximately $18 million. Construction is scheduled to begin in FY 2018, contingent on the water rights having been secured.

3 As directed by City staff. 4 Based on Blue Chip Economic Indicators 10-year projection consensus, March 2014.

REVENUE REQUIREMENT

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 2-3

In addition to these major capital projects the City has scheduled an average of $1.4 million per year of cash funded capital improvements each for the Water and Wastewater Utilities. For the Water Utility these capital improvements include mechanical sludge dewatering, replacing the water utilities building, replacing over 11,000 feet of aging pipe, and various other repairs and replacements. For the Wastewater Utility these capital improvements include rehabilitation of aging sanitary sewer lines, main replacements, lift station improvements, and various other repairs and replacements.

Base Scenario – No Debt Financed Capital Projects

The Base Scenario includes all the expenditures associated with the normal operation of the Utilities as identified in the Test Year and the cash funded capital improvements, but excludes any provision for funding the three major capital projects described earlier.

Leidos would emphasize that this level of capital spending is insufficient to meet

the Utilities regulatory obligations and customer demand. Therefore, this

scenario is provided for reference as a baseline, but is not considered by Leidos to

be a viable option for the City.

Scenario 1 – WWTP and Wastewater Reuse

Scenario 1 includes the new wastewater treatment plant and the wastewater effluent reuse project. These projects would be funded via two separate debt issuances through the Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB). The assumed terms of these debt issuances, per the City’s financial advisor, Municipal Financial Services, Inc. (MFS), are as follows: a term of 30 years, interest rate of 2.96 percent (including 0.5 percent administrative fee), 2 percent cost of issuance, with a 125 percent debt service covenant. This scenario also includes an estimate by City staff of $5,000 per year of electricity for pumping expenses associated with the wastewater reuse project, but does not include any increased operations and maintenance associated with the new wastewater treatment plant, as it will not come online within the five-year financial forecast. The average cash-funded capital spending in this scenario is higher than the base scenario, as it includes cash spending for property acquisition and design associated with the two major capital projects.

Scenario 2 – WWTP + Wastewater Reuse + Copan Raw Water Line

Scenario 2 is composed of Scenario 1, PLUS the Copan Raw Water Line. As with the other two projects, this project would be funded via a debt issuance through the OWRB. However, per MFS, the assumed interest rate for this issuance is 3.37 percent. This scenario also includes an estimate by City staff of $15,000 per year of electricity for pumping expenses associated with the Copan Raw Water Line, assumes water rights expenses of $100 per acre-foot, for 2,500 acre feet (to be paid over four years, or $62,500 per year), and an annual U.S. Corps maintenance fee of $50,000.

Section 2


Table 2–1 Capital Scenarios


Test Year

FY 2014

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Water Utility

Cash Capital Spending $1,389 $1,389 $1,389 $1,389 $1,389 $1,389

Debt Capital Spending

Wastewater Utility


Debt Capital Spending

Scenario 1

Water Utility


Debt Capital Spending $3,500

Wastewater Utility



Scenario 2

Water Utility


Debt Capital Spending $3,500 $18,000

Wastewater Utility



Revenue Requirement Forecast Based on the Test Year and the assumptions detailed above, the five-year financial forecast was developed for the Utilities. Table 2–2 shows the revenue requirement for the Utilities for the five-year forecast period. Detailed forecasts for each scenario are provided in the Appendix.

REVENUE REQUIREMENT

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 2-5

Table 2–2 Revenue Requirement Scenarios


Test Year

FY 2014

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Water Utility $10,164 $10,429 $10,620 $10,770 $10,923 $11,090


$15,724 $16,029 $15,891 $16,118 $16,350 $16,599

Annual Change 1.9% -0.9% 1.4% 1.4% 1.5%


Water Utility1 $10,214 $10,479 $10,670 $11,006 $11,160 $11,327


$16,454 $16,759 $16,621 $17,034 $17,267 $19,327

Annual Change 1.9% -0.8% 2.5% 1.4% 11.9%


Water Utility3 $10,214 $10,479 $10,670 $11,119 $12,270 $12,438


$16,454 $16,759 $16,621 $17,147 $18,377 $20,438

Annual Change 1.9% -0.8% 3.2% 7.2% 11.2%

1 Difference is due to higher cash-funded capital, and new debt service starting in FY 2017. 2 Difference is due to higher cash-funded capital, and new debt service starting in FY 2019. 3 Difference is due to additional debt service starting in FY 2018 and increased O&M expenditures for Water Rights.

File: 153242/306261

Section 3 RATES

Section 3 of this report provides the estimated financial impact of current rates remaining unchanged and discusses the rates developed as part of the Study to fund the different scenarios.

Revenue Recovery from Current Rates Leidos estimates the current retail rates for the Utilities, as described in Section 1 of this report, will under-recover the revenue requirement in FY 2014 by $1.9 million. The shortfall projected over the five-year study period under the Base Case scenario as presented in Table 3–1.

Table 3–1 Revenue Recovery from Current Rates Under Base Case Scenario


Test Year

FY 2014

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

WATER

Projected Revenue $8,637 $8,637 $8,637 $8,637 $8,637 $8,637

Less Rev. Req. ($10,164) ($10,429) ($10,620) ($10,770) ($10,923) ($11,090)

Over/(Under) Recovery1

($1,527) ($1,792) ($1,983) ($2,133) ($2,286) ($2,453)

WASTEWATER

Projected Revenue $5,169 $5,169 $5,169 $5,169 $5,169 $5,169

Less Rev. Req. ($5,560) ($5,600) ($5,271) ($5,348) ($5,427) ($5,508)

Over/(Under) Recovery1

($391) ($430) ($102) ($179) ($258) ($339)

Combined Over/ (Under) Recovery1

($1,918) ($2,223) ($2,085) ($2,311) ($2,544) ($2,792)

1 These under-recoveries are due primarily to the increase in cash-funded capital outlays for both Water and Wastewater.

If the City elects to maintain the existing rates, it is projected that the Utilities will need to withdraw funds from the Operating Reserves in order to compensate for the revenue shortfall. The Utilities currently have sufficient funds in the Operating Reserve to accommodate some revenue under-recovery. However, eventually rates will need to be adjusted.

Section 3

3-2 Leidos, Inc. City of Bartlesville Water & Wastewater Rate Study Report - Final Report.docx 8/20/14

Retail Rates Leidos calculated the following retail rates for the various scenarios described in Section 2 of this report. The rates shown are assumed to be effective as of July 1 in each fiscal year. Based on the five-year financial forecast, these rates should be sufficient to maintain the financial integrity of the Utilities in each of the scenarios. Detailed analyses of the revenue recovery from water and wastewater rates by scenario are provided in the Appendix.

Water Rates

Retail water rates for the City were last increased in 2006. Based on the City’s goal of establishing rates to assure adequate revenues for operations, debt service obligations, and capital improvements water rate scenarios were calculated as described below.

Minimum Bills

The monthly minimum bills reflect a balance of two critical objectives – minimum bills substantial enough to provide revenue stability to the Utility while low enough to be affordable for low income customers. To achieve this, the minimum bill was calculated at a level sufficient to collect sufficient revenue to fulfill the water utility’s debt service obligations.

The minimum bills for water customers with meters larger than 3/4-inch are higher to reflect the demand capacities of the various water meter sizes. The example minimum bills have been adjusted to be consistent with meter factors based on American Water Works Association (AWWA) meter capacity standards.5 This is discussed further in Section 5 of this report.

Table 3–2 provides the minimum bills for the five-year forecast period. A comprehensive listing of the water and wastewater rates (including monthly minimum bills) is provided in the Appendix.

5 It should be noted that this results in a significant “one-time” adjustment for the 2-inch and larger meters in FY 2015.

RATES

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 3-3

Table 3–2 Water Monthly Minimum Bill1

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Meter Size (inches)

5/8” $12.19 $12.74 $13.31 $13.91 $14.54 $15.19

1” $21.73 $31.85 $33.28 $34.78 $36.35 $37.98

1 1/2” $33.60 $63.70 $66.55 $69.55 $72.70 $75.95

2” $47.35 $101.92 $106.48 $111.28 $116.32 $121.52

3” $72.66 $191.10 $199.65 $208.65 $218.10 $227.85

4” $135.16 $318.50 $332.75 $347.75 $363.50 $379.75

6” $256.88 $637.00 $665.50 $695.50 $727.00 $759.50

8” $485.39 $1,019.20 $1,064.80 $1,112.80 $1,163.20 $1,215.20


Meter Size (inches)

5/8” $12.19 $12.74 $13.31 $13.91 $14.54 $15.19

1” $21.73 $31.85 $33.28 $34.78 $36.35 $37.98

1 1/2” $33.60 $63.70 $66.55 $69.55 $72.70 $75.95

2” $47.35 $101.92 $106.48 $111.28 $116.32 $121.52

3” $72.66 $191.10 $199.65 $208.65 $218.10 $227.85

4” $135.16 $318.50 $332.75 $347.75 $363.50 $379.75

6” $256.88 $637.00 $665.50 $695.50 $727.00 $759.50

8” $485.39 $1,019.20 $1,064.80 $1,112.80 $1,163.20 $1,215.20


Meter Size (inches)

5/8” $12.19 $13.35 $14.62 $16.01 $17.53 $19.20

1” $21.73 $33.38 $36.55 $40.03 $43.83 $48.00

1 1/2” $33.60 $66.75 $73.10 $80.05 $87.65 $96.00

2” $47.35 $106.80 $116.96 $128.08 $140.24 $153.60

3” $72.66 $200.25 $219.30 $240.15 $262.95 $288.00

4” $135.16 $333.75 $365.50 $400.25 $438.25 $480.00

6” $256.88 $667.50 $731.00 $800.50 $876.50 $960.00

8” $485.39 $1,068.00 $1,169.60 $1,280.80 $1,402.40 $1,536.00

1 Outside City Limits minimum bills are equal to 125% of Inside City rate.


The retail water rates include a new water capital investment fee, intended to function similarly to the City’s existing wastewater capital investment fee. The new fee would

Section 3


be established on a volumetric basis (flat rate per 1,000 gallons), and would be intended to collect revenue to fund the cash-funded (i.e. pay-as-you-go) capital projects. In all three scenarios the water capital investment fee is forecast at $0.85 per 1,000 gallons.

Volumetric Charge

Tables 3-3 through 3-5 provide the volumetric rates associated with each scenario evaluated for the five-year forecast. For customers with water meters 2-inches in diameter and smaller, all three scenarios reflect a change from a “declining” block rate structure to an “inclining” block rate structure. This change is made because water is a limited resource, and with the intention of promoting water conservation. Under this “inclining” block rate structure customers pay a higher rate per 1,000 gallons when they use more. As before, the first 2,000 gallons are included in the minimum bill.

Customers with water meters 3-inches and larger in diameter will pay a flat volumetric rate regardless of how much is consumed. The flat volumetric rate for larger users is designed to reflect the fact that many of the larger customers are businesses and wholesale customers, who may have less ability to conserve water. The increases in their flat volumetric rates will still “drive” behavior to conserve water where practical.

Outside city volumetric rates are proposed to be set to 125 percent of the In-City rates, versus the current 175 percent of In-City rates. The current rate of $5.83 per 1,000 gallons will be retained until, starting in FY 2017, when the 125 percent multiplier will begin to phase in. See Tables 3-3 through 3-5 for details.

RATES

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 3-5

Table 3–3 Base Scenario – Volumetric Rates (per 1,000 gallons)

Current Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

In-City

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $3.33 $3.33 $3.51 $3.70 $3.90 $4.11

10,001-25,000 gal $3.33 $3.66 $3.86 $4.07 $4.29 $4.52

25,001-50,000 gal $3.33 $4.00 $4.21 $4.44 $4.68 $4.93

>50,000 gal $3.331 $4.33 $4.56 $4.81 $5.07 $5.34

Meters ≥3-Inches $3.331 $3.33 $3.51 $3.70 $3.90 $4.11

Outside City

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83

10,001-25,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83

25,001-50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.85 $6.16

>50,000 gal $5.831 $5.83 $5.83 $6.01 $6.34 $6.68

Meters ≥3-Inches $5.831 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83


Section 3


Table 3–4 Scenario 1 – Volumetric Rates (per 1,000 gallons)

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

In-City

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $3.33 $3.45 $3.64 $3.84 $4.05 $4.27

10,001-25,000 gal $3.33 $3.80 $4.00 $4.22 $4.46 $4.70

25,001-50,000 gal $3.33 $4.14 $4.37 $4.61 $4.86 $5.12

>50,000 gal $3.331 $4.49 $4.73 $4.99 $5.27 $5.55

Meters ≥3-Inches $3.331 $3.45 $3.64 $3.84 $4.05 $4.27

Outside City

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83

10,001-25,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.88

25,001-50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $6.08 $6.40

>50,000 gal $5.831 $5.83 $5.91 $6.24 $6.59 $6.94

Meters ≥3-Inches $5.831 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83


RATES

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 3-7

Table 3–5 Scenario 2 – Volumetric Rates (per 1,000 gallons)

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

In-City

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $3.33 $3.45 $3.66 $3.88 $4.11 $4.36

10,001-25,000 gal $3.33 $3.80 $4.03 $4.27 $4.52 $4.80

25,001-50,000 gal $3.33 $4.14 $4.39 $4.66 $4.93 $5.23

>50,000 gal $3.331 $4.49 $4.76 $5.04 $5.34 $5.67

Meters ≥3-Inches $3.331 $3.45 $3.66 $3.88 $4.11 $4.36

Outside City

Meters <3-Inches

0-2,000 gal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83

10,001-25,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $6.00

25,001-50,000 gal $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $6.16 $6.54

>50,000 gal $5.831 $5.83 $5.95 $6.30 $6.68 $7.09

Meters ≥3-Inches $5.831 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83 $5.83


Projected Revenue Recovery

Under the example rates, revenue recovery was projected for the five-year financial projection. Table 3–6 provides a summary of the projected revenue recovery. For more detail refer to the Appendix.

Section 3


Table 3–6 Projected Water Revenue Recovery


Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Minimum Bill $2,956 $3,088 $3,227 $3,374 $3,525


$1,423 $1,423 $1,423 $1,423 $1,423

Volumetric Rate $5,601 $5,846 $6,108 $6,383 $6,672

Total $9,981 $10,358 $10,759 $11,180 $11,620


Minimum Bill $2,956 $3,088 $3,227 $3,374 $3,525


$1,423 $1,423 $1,423 $1,423 $1,423

Volumetric Rate $5,767 $6,024 $6,300 $6,592 $6,894

Total $10,147 $10,536 $10,951 $11,389 $11,842


Minimum Bill $3,098 $3,392 $3,715 $4,067 $4,455


$1,423 $1,423 $1,423 $1,423 $1,423

Volumetric Rate $5,767 $6,054 $6,356 $6,672 $7,019

Total $10,288 $10,869 $11,494 $12,163 $12,898

Wastewater Rates

Retail wastewater rates for the City were last increased in 2013. Based on the City’s goal of establishing rates to assure adequate revenues for operations, debt service obligations, and capital improvements, wastewater rate scenarios were calculated as described below.

Minimum Bills

Similar to the water rates, the wastewater monthly minimum bills reflect a balance of two critical objectives – minimum bills substantial enough to provide revenue stability to the Utility while low enough to be affordable for low income customers. To achieve this, the minimum bill was calculated at a level sufficient to collect sufficient revenue to service the wastewater utility’s debt service obligations. For the base scenario, which includes no new debt issuances, this means no change to the City’s current minimum monthly charge. For Scenario 1, the minimum monthly charge increases by $1.40 per year to collect sufficient revenue by FY 2019 to service the debt associated

RATES

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 3-9

with the new wastewater treatment plant. The minimum bills for these scenarios are presented in Table 3–7.

Table 3–7 Wastewater Minimum Monthly Bill

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Minimum Monthly Bill $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93

Scenario 1

Minimum Monthly Bill $2.93 $4.33 $5.73 $7.13 $8.53 $9.93

Wastewater Capital Investment Fee

The wastewater capital investment fee is a volumetric-based fee (flat rate per 1,000 gallons) that is used for maintaining the City’s wastewater infrastructure in compliance with state and federal regulatory standards. Under both wastewater scenarios the level of the fee is intended to collect sufficient revenue to fund the cash-funded (i.e. pay-as-you-go) capital projects. The wastewater capital investment fees for these scenarios are presented in Table 3–8. Scenario 1 is higher than the Base Scenario because of the inclusion of cash-funded property acquisition and design associated with the new wastewater treatment facility.

Table 3–8 Wastewater Capital Investment Fee

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario


$1.25 $1.28 $1.31 $1.34 $1.37 $1.40

Scenario 1


$1.25 $1.44 $1.66 $1.91 $2.20 $2.53

Volumetric Charge

The wastewater volumetric charge is a flat rate per 1,000 gallons. Under both wastewater scenarios, the level of the volumetric rate is intended to collect sufficient revenue to fund the normal operations and maintenance of the wastewater utility. Because the normal operations and maintenance costs do not differ in the five-year forecast (only the capital outlays), the volumetric rates in each scenario is the same. Table 3–9 provides the volumetric rates.

Section 3


Table 3–9 Wastewater Volumetric Rate

Current

Rates

Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

All Scenarios

Volumetric rate

per 1,000 gallons

$3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Projected Revenue Recovery

Under the example rates, revenue recovery was projected for the five-year financial projection. Table 3–10 provides a summary of the projected revenue recovery. For more detail refer to the Appendix.

Table 3–10 Projected Wastewater Revenue Recovery


Year 1

FY 2015

Year 2

FY 2016

Year 3

FY 2017

Year 4

FY 2018

Year 5

FY 2019

Base Scenario

Minimum Bill $537 $537 $537 $537 $537

Wastewater Capital Invest Fee

$1,382 $1,415 $1,447 $1,479 $1,512

Volumetric Rate $3,337 $3,391 $3,445 $3,499 $3,553

Total $5,256 $5,342 $5,429 $5,515 $5,601

Scenario 1

Minimum Bill $793 $1,050 $1,306 $1,563 $1,819

Wastewater Capital Invest Fee

$1,555 $1,793 $2,063 $2,376 $2,732

Volumetric Rate $3,337 $3,391 $3,445 $3,499 $3,553

Total $5,685 $6,233 $6,814 $7,437 $8,104

Monitor Water Consumption and Financial Conditions For the purpose of estimating the future operating characteristics of the Utilities, water consumption in FY 2013, was evaluated and compared against rainfall data in order to determine normalized consumption patterns. This methodology prevents rates from being developed based on abnormally wet or dry conditions, which would potentially cause the Utilities to over or under recover the revenue requirement. For example, if water sales during a dry year were used to establish volumetric rates, the City would risk setting a volumetric rate too low to recover costs under normal rainfall conditions.

RATES

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 3-11

Water demand is relatively inelastic - meaning it is not very sensitive to price increases. Elasticity studies of residential (indoor and outdoor) water demand have shown an average reduction in water use of one to three percent for every ten percent increase in an average monthly water bill.6

Because of the change in water rate structure from a declining block rate to an inclining block rate, Leidos used the following assumption for consumption demand elasticity.

Table 3–11 Water Consumption Elasticity

Consumption Blocks

Year 5

FY 2019

0-2,000 gal 0%

2,001-10,000 gal 0%

10,001-25,000 gal 1%

25,001-50,000 gal 3%

>50,000 gal 5%

The impact of changes to water rate design can be difficult to predict. Because of this there is a risk that the City could under recover the revenue requirement if customers significantly reduce consumption. The City should closely monitor expenses, customer growth, water consumption, and revenues to ensure the financial integrity of the Utilities. Actual results that differ significantly from the financial forecast utilized in the Study may justify a change in the schedule of rate adjustments.

6 Principals of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges (M1 Manual), AWWA, Fifth Edition, 2000, page 158

File: 153242/306261

Section 4 BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS

Section 4 of this report illustrates how the City’s rates compare to the current rates in six similar communities. It should be noted that all water and wastewater systems are different, even for communities of comparable size. Some systems are older than others, which directly impacts the cost of operations and maintenance. Further, some systems are well maintained while others may have deteriorating infrastructure. Some systems may have “inexpensive” sources of water, while other cities must pump water significant distances to ensure reliable source capacity. Postponing or trimming expenditures for routine maintenance and repair on water and wastewater systems may lower the cost of operating the system in the short term, but eventually the short term cost savings will translate into greater long term capital needs.

Current Rates

Stillwater

The City of Stillwater last raised water rates effective July 1, 2014, with an increase to the typical residential water bill of 10 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The City of Stillwater charges a water minimum bill based on meter size. The water volumetric rates are flat. Outside City Limits customers pay minimum bills and volumetric rates equal to 1.5 times the inside City Limits rates. Table 4-1 provides the current retail water rates.

Section 4


Table 4–1 City of Stillwater Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL 1

Meter Size (Inches) Inside City Outside City

3/4 $ 6.60 $ 9.91

1 10.38 15.58

1 ½ 19.82 29.74

2 31.15 46.73

3 67.02 100.52

4 114.21 171.32

6 236.91 355.37

VOLUMETRIC 2 Inside City Outside City

All Consumption $ 6.60 $ 9.91

Notes: 1) Rates effective July 1, 2014 2) Rate per 1,000 gallons

The City of Stillwater last raised wastewater rates effective July 1, 2014, with an increase to the typical residential wastewater bill of 15 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). Customers pay the volumetric rate component based on a winter average of December, January, February, and March, except for industrial consumers, who are charged based on actual usage. Outside City customers pay minimum bills and volumetric rates equal to 1.5 times the inside City Limits rates. Table 4-2 provides the current retail wastewater rates.

Table 4–2 City of Stillwater Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL Inside City Outside City

$ 8.13 $ 12.19


$ 3.30 $ 4.96


BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 4-3

Broken Arrow

The City of Broken Arrow last raised water rates effective July 1, 2014, with an increase to the typical residential water bill of 7.6 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The City of Broken Arrow charges a water minimum bill based on meter size. The water volumetric rates are flat. Outside City Limits customers pay a higher monthly service charge and volumetric rate, as shown in Table 4-3. Table 4-3 provides the current retail water rates.

Table 4–3 City of Broken Arrow Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL 1


3/4 $ 7.70 $ 8.70

1 8.50 9.45

1 ½ 11.40 12.70

2 16.20 18.00

3 37.00 41.50

4 61.00 68.50

6 121.00 135.00

8 180.00 202.00

10 or more 240.00 269.00

VOLUMETRIC 2

Monthly Consumption Inside City Outside City

Residential $ 3.64 $ 4.24

Commercial 3.44 4.23

Park/Cem/Golf Course 5.50


The City of Broken Arrow last raised wastewater rates effective July 1, 2014, with an increase to the typical residential wastewater bill of 7.3 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The wastewater minimum bill varies by water meter size. Outside City Limits customers pay a higher monthly service charge and volumetric rate, as shown in Table 4-4. The wastewater volumetric rate for all customers is charged based on a winter average of November, December, January and February water consumption. Table 4-4 provides the current retail wastewater rates.

Section 4


Table 4–4 City of Broken Arrow Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1



3/4 $ 7.50 $ 8.10

1 8.40 9.05

1 ½ 11.50 12.50

2 16.70 18.10

3 39.50 43.00

4 65.50 71.50

6 131.00 142.00

8 196.00 213.00

10 or more 261.00 284.00


Residential $ 2.38 $ 2.82

Non-Residential 2.60 2.96

Contract Sewer 2.69


Edmond

The City of Edmond last raised water rates effective November 1, 2013, with an increase to the typical residential water bill of 4.8 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The City of Edmond charges a water minimum bill based on meter size. The minimum bill includes 1,000 gallons of water consumption. Multi-family residences pay a minimum bill of $6.38 per unit and all water use over 1,000 gallons is billed at the regular volumetric rates. The water volumetric rates reflect an inclining block rate structure (after the first 1,000 gallons). Outside City Limits customers pay minimum bills and volumetric rates equal to two times the inside City Limits rates. Table 4-5 provides the current retail water rates.


File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 4-5

Table 4–5 City of Edmond Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1


Meter Size (Inches)

5/8 or 3/4 $ 6.38

1 10.51

1 ½ 20.60

2 29.15

3 58.47

4 88.47

6 177.11

8 319.77

VOLUMETRIC 2, 3

Monthly Consumption

(Gallons)

0 to 1,000

Included in Minimum Bill

1,001 to 3,000 $ 5.23

3,001 to 10,000 5.63

> 10,000 6.23

Notes: 1) Rates effective November 1, 2013 2) Rate per 1,000 gallons

The City of Edmond last raised wastewater rates effective November 1, 2013, with an increase to the typical residential wastewater bill of 10.1 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The wastewater minimum bill is the same for all customers. Multi-family residences pay a minimum bill for each unit. The residential and commercial wastewater volumetric rate is charged based on a winter average of December, February, and March. Table 4-6 provides the current retail wastewater rates.

Table 4–6 City of Edmond Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL $ 10.46

VOLUMETRIC 2 $ 2.51

Notes: 1) Rates effective November 1, 2013 2) Rate per 1,000 gallons

Section 4


Moore

The City of Moore last raised water rates effective June 30, 2014, with an increase to the typical residential water bill of 11.5 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The City of Moore charges the same water minimum bill regardless of meter size. Multi-family residences pay a minimum bill for each unit. The minimum bill includes 1,000 gallons of water consumption. The water volumetric rates reflect an inclining block rate structure (after the first 1,000 gallons). Table 4-7 provides the current retail water rates.

Table 4–7 City of Moore Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1


VOLUMETRIC 2

Monthly Consumption

(Gallons)

0 to 1,000


1,001 to 20,000 $ 3.00

> 20,000 5.23

Notes: 1) Effective June 30, 2014 2) Rate per 1,000 gallons

The City of Moore last raised wastewater rates effective June 30, 2013, with an increase to the typical residential wastewater bill of 5.6 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The wastewater minimum bill is the same for all inside City Limits customers. Multi-family residences pay a minimum bill for each unit. The residential wastewater volumetric rate is charged based on a winter average of December, January, and February. Commercial wastewater volumetric rates are charged based on 100 percent of metered water consumption. Table 4-8 provides the current retail wastewater rates.

Table 4–8 City of Moore Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1


VOLUMETRIC 2 $ 3.00

Notes: 1) Effective June 30, 2014 2) Rate per 1,000 gallons


File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 4-7

Muskogee

The City of Muskogee last raised water rates effective July 1, 2013, with an increase to the typical residential water bill of 5.0 percent. The City of Muskogee charges a water minimum bill based on meter size. The minimum bill includes 200 cubic feet of water consumption. The water volumetric rates reflect a declining block rate structure. Outside City Limits customers pay minimum bills and volumetric rates greater than the inside City Limits rates, but the relationship is not uniform and ranges between 1.18 and 2.36 times the inside rates. Table 4-9 provides the current retail water rates.

Table 4–9 City of Muskogee Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1



5/8 $ 7.22 $ 17.04

3/4 7.22 17.04

1 16.92 26.69

1 ½ 26.69 52.87

2 33.79 66.30

3 66.47 82.78

4 82.78 116.77

6 166.97 197.06

VOLUMETRIC 2

Monthly Consumption

(Cubic Feet) Inside City Outside City

0 to 200



201 to 300 $ 3.66 $ 5.27

301 to 400 3.09 4.35

401 to 2,000 2.74 3.55

2,001 to 6,000 2.45 3.14

6,001 to 10,000 2.10 2.79

10,001 to 20,000 1.93 2.50

20,001 to 40,000 1.64 2.21

> 40,000 1.11 1.28

Notes: 1) Effective July 1, 2013 2) Rate per 100 cubic feet

The City of Muskogee last raised wastewater rates effective July 1, 2013, with an increase to the typical residential wastewater bill of 5.0 percent. The wastewater

Section 4


minimum bill includes 100 cubic feet of wastewater flow. Residential and commercial wastewater volumetric rates are charged based on 100 percent of metered water consumption. Industrial customers have a different rate structure with industrial surcharges based on strength loading. Outside City Limits customers pay minimum bills and volumetric rates greater than the inside City Limits rates, but the relationship is not uniform. Table 4-10 provides the current retail wastewater rates.

Table 4–10 City of Muskogee Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1

MONTHLY MINIMUM BILL 2 $ 9.77

VOLUMETRIC 3, 4

Monthly Consumption

(Cubic Feet)

0 to 100


> 100 $ 0.95

Notes: 1) Effective July 1, 2013 2) The minimum bill for customers outside the City Limits is

1.18 times the rate for customers inside the City Limits 3) The volumetric rate for customers outside the City Limits is

1.11 times the rate for customers inside the City Limits 4) Rate per 100 cubic feet

Shawnee

The City of Shawnee last increased its water rates effective November 1, 2013, with an increase to the typical residential water bill of 1.4 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The City of Shawnee charges a water minimum bill that includes 1,000 gallons of water consumption. The water volumetric rates reflect an inclining block rate structure. Outside City Limits customers pay a volumetric rate equal to 1.5 times the inside City Limits rates. Table 4-11 provides the current retail water rates.


File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 4-9

Table 4–11 City of Shawnee Current Retail Water Rates

Current Rates1


VOLUMETRIC 3, 4

Monthly Consumption

(Gallons)

0 to 1,000


1,001 to 4,000 $ 3.89

4,001 to 1,000,000 3.99

1,000,001 to 2,000,000 4.09

> 2,000,000 4.19

Notes: 1) Effective November 1, 2013 2) The minimum bill for customers outside the City Limits is $24.06

per month 3) Volumetric rates for customers outside the City Limits are 1.5

times the rates for customers inside the City Limits 4) Rate per 1,000 gallons

The City of Shawnee last increased its wastewater rates effective November 1, 2012, with an increase to the typical residential wastewater bill of 7.4 percent (based on 7,500 gallons per month). The wastewater minimum bill includes 1,000 gallons of wastewater flow. The residential wastewater volumetric rate is charged based on a winter average of November through February. The commercial wastewater volumetric rate is charged based on 100 percent of metered water consumption. Outside City Limits customers pay volumetric rates equal to 1.5 times the inside City Limits rates. Table 4-12 provides the current retail wastewater rates.

Section 4


Table 4–12 City of Shawnee Current Retail Wastewater Rates

Current Rates1


VOLUMETRIC 3, 4

Monthly Consumption

(Gallons)

0 to 1,000


> 1,000 $ 2.90

Notes: 1) Effective November 1, 2012 2) The minimum bill for customers outside the City Limits is $20.25

per month 3) The volumetric rate for customers outside the City Limits is 1.5

times the rate for customers inside the City Limits 4) Rate per 1,000 gallons

Average Bill Comparison The tables below provide a comparison of the City’s rates with the benchmark communities. The City’s current rates and the rates identified in Section 3 for FY 2015 are provided in the tables for comparison. The average water bill for a resident inside the City Limits with a 5/8-inch water meter and 7,500 gallons of consumption is provided in Table 4-13. These billing units are representative of normal residential usage in the City. The average wastewater bill for a resident inside the City Limits with 7,500 gallons of consumption is provided in Table 4-14.


File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 4-11

Table 4–13 Typical Monthly Water Bill Comparison

Minimum Monthly Bill1

Volumetric1 Total Bill

1 Moore $ 9.50 $ 19.50 $ 29.00

2 Muskogee 7.22 23.19 30.41

3 Bartlesville – Current 12.19 18.32 30.51

4 Broken Arrow 7.70 27.30 35.00

5 Bartlesville – Base Case 2 12.74 24.69 37.43

6 Bartlesville – Scenario 1 2 12.74 25.35 38.09

7 Bartlesville – Scenario 2 2 13.35 25.35 38.70

8 Edmond 6.38 35.80 42.18

9 Shawnee 20.70 25.64 46.34

10 Stillwater 6.60 49.50 56.10

Notes: 1) Inside City Limits customers with a 5/8-inch or 3/4-inch water meter and 7,500 gallons of

consumption 2) FY 2015 example rates. Volumetric includes $0.85/1000 gallons Water Capital Investment

fee

Table 4–14 Typical Monthly Wastewater Bill Comparison

Minimum Monthly Bill1

Volumetric1 Total Bill

1 Muskogee $ 9.77 $ 8.55 $ 18.32

2 Broken Arrow 7.50 17.85 25.35

3 Edmond 10.46 18.83 29.29

4 Moore 8.00 22.50 30.50

5 Shawnee 13.50 18.85 32.35

6 Stillwater 8.13 24.75 32.88

7 Bartlesville - Current 2.93 32.18 35.11

8 Bartlesville – Base Case 2.93 32.78 35.71

9 Bartlesville – Scenario 1 4.33 33.98 38.31

Notes: 1) Inside City Limits customers with a 5/8-inch or 3/4-inch water meter and 7,500 gallons of

consumption 2) FY 2015 example rates. Volumetric includes Wastewater Capital Investment Fee

As mentioned in Section 3, the City last increased retail water rates in 2006. Figure 1 shows the typical monthly bill for a residential customer, based on an average use of

Section 4


7,500 gallons. The dashed line shown on the figure represents the effective annualized level of rate increase, distributed over the nine years since the City last raised rates. Figure 4-1 Typical Monthly Water Bill and Annualized Increase Since 2006

$25.00

$30.00

$35.00

$40.00

$45.00

$50.00

$55.00

FY 2

00

6

FY 2

00

7

FY 2

00

8

FY 2

00

9

FY 2

01

0

FY 2

01

1

FY 2

01

2

FY 2

01

3

FY 2

01

4

FY 2

01

5

FY 2

01

6

FY 2

01

7

FY 2

01

8

FY 2

01

9



Base- 2.3% per year equivalent

File: 153242/306261

Section 5 POLICY ISSUES

Section 5 of this report comments on key policy issues and discusses recommendations by Leidos for consideration by the City Council and staff. These observations are based on our experience with the conduct of cost of service and rate design studies as well as our experience in dealing with economic and financial planning issues for water and wastewater utilities across the United States.

Change to Inclining Block Rate Structure As discussed in Section 3, a change in the water rate structure from a declining block to an inclining block reflects that water is a limited resource, and that the costs of acquiring additional sources of water are higher than the existing sources. An inclining block structure which charges a higher rate per 1,000 gallons for higher levels of consumption, also known as a conservation oriented rate structure, sends a conservation price signal to the customer.

There are potential issues associated with this change which must be monitored by the City. In response to a conservation price signal, customers are expected to respond by reducing their consumption. However, the extent to which this will occur is difficult to predict. The City should closely monitor expenses, customer growth, water consumption, and revenues to ensure the financial integrity of the Utilities. Actual results that differ significantly from the financial forecast utilized in the Study may justify a change in the schedule of rate adjustments.

The blocks in the example rate package have a 10 percent step increase between each block. This is a less steeply inclined block rate than some similar utilities have used. The City may wish to evaluate both the 10 percent step and the current block tiers once they have been in effect for two to three years to assess whether they are achieving the City’s goals.

Wholesale Rates For purposes of this Cost of Service and Rate Design Study, the cost of providing wholesale water service was evaluated, based on an allocation of administrative, operation, and extra capacity costs. For the Test Year, the cost of providing service to all the City’s wholesale customers was $1.8 million. Because the majority of the City’s wholesale volumetric rates are determined by negotiated contract rather than by the City’s rate-setting authority, Leidos conservatively assumed that the wholesale volumetric rates would remain the same, rather than being subject to increases similar to the retail rates. Under their current rates, the City’s wholesale customers generated revenue of approximately $930,000, 51 percent of the allocated cost of service.

In order to ensure the sustainable financial operation of the water utility, and to ensure that the utility will collect sufficient revenue for operations, debt service, and capital

Section 5


improvements, the 49 percent of the wholesale customers allocated cost of service is borne by the retail customers. As permitted by the City’s wholesale contracts, increasing wholesale rates to recover their cost of service would lessen the impact on retail customers.

The City should review its wholesale contracts and pursue renegotiation where possible.

Increases to Wastewater Minimum Monthly Bill The City’s current rate structure is projected to recover approximately 9 percent of the FY 2015 revenue requirement for wastewater through the minimum monthly charge. In our opinion, this leaves too much of the revenue requirement to be recovered though volumetric rates, causing potential revenue instability due to fluctuations in consumption.

Leidos recommends the City transition over the course of the study period to recovering approximately 25 percent of its wastewater revenue through the minimum monthly bill. This would enable the City to collect sufficient revenue through the minimum monthly bill to meet the debt service obligations associated with the new wastewater treatment plant.

To accomplish this, Leidos has designed rates to increase the minimum monthly charge evenly over the five-year forecast in order to avoid a significant rate shock when the debt service payments begin in FY 2015. These increases represent a significant increase to this component of the wastewater bill on a percentage basis, but are less than 5 percent of the overall average bill. Nevertheless, the reason for these changes should be communicated to customers, and the impact to low income customers’ ability to reduce their minimum bills should be considered.

Septic Fee Surcharge The City charges a fee for discharge of septic waste. The City has identified as an issue that the City currently is receiving septic waste from haulers from far outside the City’s service area. This potentially presents a burden to the City, and the City should consider charging septic haulers from outside the City a surcharge of 125 percent or consider a surcharge of up to 150 percent. Some type of equitable multiplier would be consistent with the City’s multiplier for Outside City Limits customers.

Copan Lake Water Rights As discussed in Section 2 of this report, the City has determined that it needs to secure additional water rights in order to improve the Water Utility’s resilience during drought conditions (over a long-term thirty to fifty year planning horizon). The City is currently pursuing water rights on the U.S. Corps-owned Copan Lake. At the direction of the City, for purposes of this rate study, Leidos has used a value of $100 per acre-foot for the assumed cost of securing these water rights. However, it is our

POLICY ISSUES

File: 153242/306261 Leidos, Inc. 5-3

understanding that the U.S. Corps could charge as much as $2,000 per acre-foot. This would increase the annual revenue requirement by more than $1.1 million, and would require an additional rate increase of 5 percent to the volumetric rate in order to meet that increased revenue requirement.

Schedule 1

Test Year - WaterCity of Bartlesville, OK

Water and Wastewater Cost of Service and

Rate Design Study

FINAL

8/20/14

Line Budget Test Inflation

No Dept Acct Project Account Name FY 2014 Adjustments Year Factor

1 EXPENSES

2 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund

3 0 44142 PRINT,COPIES & FAX $0 General

4 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS 0 General

5 0 46224 Realized Gain/Loss 0 General

6 0 47215 REPAIRS & REPLACEME 0 General

7 0 47217 RESTITUTION 0 General

8 0 47311 LAND\BLDG\STRUCT RE 0 General

9 0 48221 SALE OF STOCK 0 General

10 0 48222 SALE / SURPLUS PROP 0 General

11 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT O 0 General

12 0 49715 BMA - WATER 0 General

13 Water Plant

14 720 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $584,000 $584,000 Salaries

15 720 51120 OVERTIME 29,000 29,000 Salaries

16 720 51130 FICA 45,000 45,000 Salaries

17 720 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 134,583 134,583 Insurance

18 720 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 88,000 88,000 Salaries

19 720 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 9,000 9,000 Salaries

20 720 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 2,577 2,577 Insurance

21 720 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 Salaries

22 720 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 8,800 8,800 General

23 720 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 560,000 560,000 General

24 720 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 209,000 (183,264) 25,736 General

25 720 52510 OTHER SERVICES 130,000 130,000 General

26 720 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 174,000 174,000 General

27 720 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 1,500 1,500 General

28 720 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,600 1,600 General

29 720 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 860,000 860,000 Chemicals

30 720 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 4,320 4,320 Equip Fuel

31 720 53510 FUEL 10,000 10,000 Equip Fuel

32 720 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 50,000 50,000 Equip Fuel

33 720 55920 BUILDINGS & STRUCTU 0 General

34 720 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 Equip Fuel

35 Water Admin

36 725 51110 REGULAR SALARIES 161,000 161,000 Salaries

37 725 51120 OVERTIME 0 Salaries

38 725 51130 FICA 13,000 13,000 Salaries



41 725 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 0 Salaries


43 725 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES 0 General

44 725 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 12,500 12,500 General

45 725 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 60,000 (29,261) 30,739 General


47 725 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 500 500 General

48 725 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 0 General

49 725 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,200 1,200 General

50 725 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,500 4,500 General

1/3

Schedule 1



Rate Design Study

FINAL

8/20/14



51 725 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 0 Equip Fuel

52 725 53510 FUEL 750 750 Equip Fuel

53 725 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 500 500 Equip Fuel

54 Distribution



57 730 51130 FICA 60,000 60,000 Salaries




61 730 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 76,929 76,929 Salaries

62 730 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 Salaries


64 730 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 0 0 General

65 730 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 7,000 7,000 General



68 730 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 6,000 6,000 General

69 730 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 0 General



72 730 53510 FUEL 47,500 47,500 Equip Fuel


74 730 53610 12013 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 0 Equip Fuel

75 730 55930 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 0 General

76 730 55930 10038 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 0 General

77 730 55930 12016 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 General

78 730 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 0 Equip Fuel

79 900 59101 TRANSFER TO GENERAL 1,208,178 1,208,178 General

80 900 59663 TRANSFER TO COLLISI 0 None

81 900 59670 TRANSFER TO STABILI 120,916 92,502 Calculated

82 900 59675 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL 1,500,000 (1,500,000) 0 None

83 950 58110 OPERATING RESERVES 96,752 92,502 Calculated

84 950 58120 COMPENSATED ABSENCE 67,105 67,105 Salaries

85 SUBTOTAL - FUND 510 $7,830,571 $6,085,381

86

87 FUND 715 - BMA Water

88 740 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES $5,000 $5,000 General

89 740 52910 DEBT SERVICE - INT 1,700,000 1,700,000 Calculated

90 740 52911 DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 1,750,000 1,750,000 Calculated

91 740 55940 12016 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 Equip Fuel

92 741 52210 12016 FINANCIAL SERVICES 0 0 General

93 741 52910 DEBT SERVICE - INT 0 0 Calculated

94 741 52911 DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 0 0 Calculated

95 741 53610 12016 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 0 Equip Fuel

96 741 55940 12016 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 330,000 (330,000) 0 Equip Fuel

97 900 59454 Trans to Wastewater 0 Calculated

98 900 59509 WASTEWATER OPERATIN 0 Calculated

99 900 59510 TRANSFER TO WATER 7,620,080 (7,620,080) 0 Calculated

100 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $3,785,000 $3,455,000

2/3

Schedule 1



Rate Design Study

FINAL

8/20/14



101

102 REVENUES

103 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund

104 0 43115 FEMA GRANTS $0 General

105 0 44142 PRINT,COPIES & FAX $200 200 General

106 0 44892 FLEET FUEL FEE 0 General

107 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS 0 0 General

108 0 47111 DONATIONS 0 General

109 0 47125 AIRPORT USER FEE 0 General

110 0 47211 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 0 General

111 0 47215 REPAIRS & REPLACEMENTS 0 0 General

112 0 47216 INSURANCE REIMBURSEMENT 0 General

113 0 47311 LAND\BLDG\STRUCT RENTAL 0 0 General

114 0 48211 SALE OF FIXED ASSETS 0 General

115 0 48222 SALE OF STOCK 0 0 General

116 0 48222 SALE / SURPLUS PROPERTY 0 0 General

117 0 48511 REIMB.OPERATING EXPENSE 0 General

118 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT OBLIG 0 General

119 0 49509 WASTEWATER / SEWER 0 General

120 0 49715 BMA - WATER 7,620,080 (7,620,080) 0 General

121 SUBTOTAL - FUND 510 $200 $200

122

123 FUND 715 - BMA Water

124 0 43415 STATE FUNDS (NOT GRANT) $0 General

125 0 44611 WATER USE $5,888,335 ($5,888,335) 0 General

126 0 44612 MONTHLY SERVICE FEES 2,424,303 (2,424,303) 0 General

127 0 44613 SERVICE ORDER FEES 42,805 42,805 General

128 0 44614 DELINQUENT SERVICE FEES 66,368 66,368 General

129 0 44615 WATER TAP FEES 51,643 51,643 General

130 0 44618 OTHER WATER FEES 929 929 General

131 0 44619 LATE PENALTY 200,001 200,001 General

132 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS 37,800 (37,800) 0 Calculated

133 0 46225 JUDGMENT INTEREST RECEIVE 0 General


135 0 47411 BAD DEBT COLLECTIONS 0 0 General

136 0 47515 OVERPAYMENTS/REFUNDS 0 General

137 0 48411 NOTE OBLIGATION PROCEED 0 0 Calculated

138 0 49454 WWCIF 255,242 255,242 Calculated

139 0 49710 BMA - WASTEWATER 148,040 148,040 Calculated

140 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $9,115,466 $765,028

141

142 TOTAL WATER EXPENDITURES $11,615,571 $9,540,381

143 TOTAL WATER REVENUES $9,115,666 $765,228

144 (Revenues in Test Year Exclude Rate Revenue)

145 Over/(Under) Recovery ($2,499,905)

146

147 Water Revenue Requirement $8,775,153

3/3

Schedule 2Revenue Requirement - Water

City of Bartlesville, OKWater and Wastewater Cost of Service and

Rate Design StudyBASE CASE

FINAL8/20/2014

Revenue Requirement - WaterTest Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Year FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

1 EXPENSES2 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund13 Water Plant14 720 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $584,000 $597,432 $611,173 $625,230 $639,610 $654,32115 720 51120 OVERTIME 29,000 29,667 30,349 31,047 31,761 32,49216 720 51130 FICA 45,000 46,035 47,094 48,177 49,285 50,41917 720 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 134,583 144,004 154,084 164,870 176,411 188,76018 720 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 88,000 90,024 92,095 94,213 96,380 98,59619 720 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 9,000 9,207 9,419 9,635 9,857 10,08420 720 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 2,577 2,757 2,950 3,157 3,378 3,61421 720 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 0 0 0 022 720 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 8,800 9,002 9,209 9,421 9,638 9,86023 720 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 560,000 572,880 586,056 599,536 613,325 627,43124 720 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 25,736 26,328 26,933 27,553 28,186 28,83525 720 52510 OTHER SERVICES 130,000 132,990 136,049 139,178 142,379 145,65426 720 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 174,000 178,002 182,096 186,284 190,569 194,95227 720 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 1,500 1,535 1,570 1,606 1,643 1,68128 720 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,600 1,637 1,674 1,713 1,752 1,79329 720 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 860,000 879,780 900,015 920,715 941,892 963,55530 720 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 4,320 4,419 4,521 4,625 4,731 4,84031 720 53510 FUEL 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20432 720 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 50,000 51,150 52,326 53,530 54,761 56,02133 720 55920 BUILDINGS & STRUCTU 0 0 0 0 0 034 720 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 0 0 0 0 035 WW Reuse Operation 0 0 0 0 0 036 Copan Pumping Costs 0 0 0 0 0 037 Copan Water Rights 0 0 0 0 0 038 Copan O&M Expense - Corps Fee 0 0 0 0 0 039 Water Admin40 725 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $161,000 $164,703 $168,491 $172,366 $176,331 $180,38741 725 51120 OVERTIME 0 0 0 0 0 042 725 51130 FICA 13,000 13,299 13,605 13,918 14,238 14,56543 725 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 26,917 28,801 30,817 32,974 35,283 37,75244 725 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 37,000 37,851 38,722 39,612 40,523 41,45545 725 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 0 0 0 0 0 046 725 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 2,000 2,046 2,093 2,141 2,190 2,24147 725 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 048 725 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 12,500 12,788 13,082 13,382 13,690 14,00549 725 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 30,739 31,446 32,169 32,909 33,666 34,44050 725 52510 OTHER SERVICES 6,300 6,445 6,593 6,745 6,900 7,05951 725 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 500 512 523 535 548 56052 725 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 0 0 0 0 053 725 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,200 1,228 1,256 1,285 1,314 1,34454 725 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,500 4,604 4,709 4,818 4,929 5,04255 725 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 0 056 725 53510 FUEL 750 767 785 803 821 84057 725 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 500 512 523 535 548 56058 Water Distribution59 730 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $782,000 $799,986 $818,386 $837,209 $856,464 $876,16360 730 51120 OVERTIME 46,000 47,058 48,140 49,248 50,380 51,53961 730 51130 FICA 60,000 61,380 62,792 64,236 65,713 67,22562 730 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 179,444 192,005 205,445 219,827 235,214 251,67963 730 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 121,000 123,783 126,630 129,542 132,522 135,57064 730 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20465 730 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 76,929 78,698 80,508 82,360 84,254 86,19266 730 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 0 0 0 067 730 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 9,275 9,488 9,707 9,930 10,158 10,39268 730 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 0 0 0 0 0 069 730 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 7,000 7,161 7,326 7,494 7,667 7,84370 730 52510 OTHER SERVICES 2,150 2,199 2,250 2,302 2,355 2,40971 730 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 10,400 10,639 10,884 11,134 11,390 11,65272 730 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 6,000 6,138 6,279 6,424 6,571 6,72273 730 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 074 730 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 6,175 6,317 6,462 6,611 6,763 6,91975 730 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 6,200 6,343 6,488 6,638 6,790 6,94776 730 53510 FUEL 47,500 48,593 49,710 50,853 52,023 53,22077 730 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 240,000 245,520 251,167 256,944 262,854 268,899

Page 1/2




FINAL8/20/2014


8383 900 59101 TRANSFER TO GENERAL $1,208,178 $1,235,966 $1,264,393 $1,293,474 $1,323,224 $1,353,65884 900 59663 TRANSFER TO COLLISI 0 0 0 0 0 085 900 59670 TRANSFER TO STABILI 92,502 94,952 97,482 100,094 102,791 105,57987 950 58110 OPERATING RESERVES 92,502 94,952 97,482 100,094 102,791 105,57988 950 58120 COMPENSATED ABSENCE 67,105 68,648 70,227 71,843 73,495 75,18589 SUBTOTAL - FUND 510 $6,085,381 $6,242,136 $6,403,672 $6,570,181 $6,741,865 $6,918,9389091 FUND 715 - BMA Water

106 740 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES $5,000 $5,115 $5,233 $5,353 $5,476 $5,602107 740 52910 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - INT 1,700,000 1,631,634 1,568,520 1,512,786 1,455,620 1,396,530108 740 52911 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 1,750,000 1,934,852 1,631,783 1,679,744 1,727,573 1,785,664109 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - INT 0 0 0 0 0 0110 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 0 0 0 0 0 0120 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $3,455,000 $3,571,601 $3,205,535 $3,197,883 $3,188,669 $3,187,796121122 CASH-FUNDED123 Cash-Funded CIP $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200124125 SUBTOTAL - CIP $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200 $1,389,200126127 TOTAL EXPENSES $10,929,581 $11,202,938 $10,998,407 $11,157,263 $11,319,734 $11,495,934128129 REVENUES130 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund131 0 43115 FEMA GRANTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0132 0 44142 PRINT,COPIES & FAX 200 205 209 214 219 224148 SUBTOTAL - FUND 510 $200 $205 $209 $214 $219 $224149150 FUND 715 - BMA Water154 0 44613 SERVICE ORDER FEES $42,805 $43,790 $44,797 $45,827 $46,881 $47,959155 0 44614 DELINQUENT SERVICE FEES 66,368 67,894 69,456 71,054 72,688 74,360156 0 44615 WATER TAP FEES 51,643 52,831 54,046 55,289 56,561 57,861157 0 44618 OTHER WATER FEES 929 950 972 995 1,017 1,041158 0 44619 LATE PENALTY 200,001 204,601 209,307 214,121 219,046 224,084165 0 49454 WWCIF 255,242 255,242 0 0 0 0166 0 49710 BMA - WASTEWATER 148,040 148,040 0 0 0 0167 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $765,028 $773,348 $378,578 $387,285 $396,193 $405,305168169 TOTAL REVENUES $765,228 $773,553 $378,787 $387,499 $396,412 $405,529170171 Revenue Requirement $10,164,353 $10,429,385 $10,619,620 $10,769,764 $10,923,322 $11,090,405

Page 2/2

Schedule 3Example Rates - Water



FINAL8/20/2014

WATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Base ScenarioCurrent Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Rates FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Revenue Requirement $10,164,353 $10,429,385 $10,619,620 $10,769,764 $10,923,322 $11,090,405

Retail Billing Units

Connection CountIn-City - Less than 3 inches

5/8" 14,090 14,090 14,090 14,090 14,0901" 997 997 997 997 997

1 1/2" 99 99 99 99 992" 106 106 106 106 106

Outside - Less than 3 inches5/8" 230 230 230 230 2301" 36 36 36 36 36

1 1/2" 0 0 0 0 02" 5 5 5 5 5

Meters > 3 inches3" 22 22 22 22 224" 9 9 9 9 96" 3 3 3 3 3

Hydrants 17 17 17 17 17

Water Consumption (1,000 gallons)In-City - Less than 3 inches 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262Outside - Less than 3 inches 27,131 27,131 27,131 27,131 27,131Meters > 3 inches 245,257 245,257 245,257 245,257 245,257Wholesale/Other 57,571 57,571 57,571 57,571 57,571Strike Axe 28,715 28,715 28,715 28,715 28,715City of Dewey 212,701 212,701 212,701 212,701 212,701Osage Water District #1 28,075 28,075 28,075 28,075 28,075Wash County Rural Water Dist #2 48,106 48,106 48,106 48,106 48,106Wash County Rural Water Dist #5 2,028 2,028 2,028 2,028 2,028Minnesota Water District 914 914 914 914 914Town of Ochelata 3,224 3,224 3,224 3,224 3,224Ramona Public Works 15,875 15,875 15,875 15,875 15,875Total Volume Billed 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859

Page 1/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Minimum BillRates per Month - In City 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5%

5/8" $12.19 $12.74 $13.31 $13.91 $14.54 $15.191" $21.73 31.85 33.28 34.78 36.35 37.98

1 1/2" $33.60 63.70 66.55 69.55 72.70 75.952" $47.35 101.92 106.48 111.28 116.32 121.523" $72.66 191.10 199.65 208.65 218.10 227.854" $135.16 318.50 332.75 347.75 363.50 379.756" $256.88 637.00 665.50 695.50 727.00 759.508" $485.39 1,019.20 1,064.80 1,112.80 1,163.20 1,215.20

Rates per Month - Outside City5/8" $12.19 $15.93 $16.64 $17.39 $18.18 $18.991" $21.73 39.81 41.60 43.48 45.44 47.48

1 1/2" $33.60 79.63 83.19 86.94 90.88 94.942" $47.35 127.40 133.10 139.10 145.40 151.903" $72.66 238.88 249.56 260.81 272.63 284.814" $135.16 398.13 415.94 434.69 454.38 474.696" $256.88 796.25 831.88 869.38 908.75 949.388" $485.39 1,274.00 1,331.00 1,391.00 1,454.00 1,519.00

Annual Minimum Bill RevenueIn-City - Less than 3 inches

5/8" $2,154,079 $2,250,455 $2,351,903 $2,458,423 $2,568,3251" 381,053 398,162 416,108 434,891 454,393

1 1/2" 75,676 79,061 82,625 86,368 90,2292" 129,642 135,443 141,548 147,959 154,573

Outside - Less than 3 inches5/8" $43,953 $45,920 $47,990 $50,163 $52,4061" 17,199 17,971 18,781 19,629 20,509

1 1/2" 0 0 0 0 02" 7,644 7,986 8,346 8,724 9,114

Meters > 3 inches3" $50,450 $52,708 $55,084 $57,578 $60,1524" 34,398 35,937 37,557 39,258 41,0136" 22,932 23,958 25,038 26,172 27,3428" 0 0 0 0 0

Hydrants $38,984 $40,729 $42,565 $44,492 $46,481Total Minimum Bill Revenue $2,956,011 $3,088,329 $3,227,544 $3,373,658 $3,524,537

Minimum Bill Revenue % of Debt Service 82.8% 96.3% 100.9% 105.8% 110.6%

Minimum Bill Recovery 28.3% 29.1% 30.0% 30.9% 31.8%

Page 2/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Revenue Requirement to be Recovered from Volumetric ChargesWater Capital Investment Fee, per 1,000 gallons

In-City - Less than 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85Outside - Less than 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85Meters > 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85Wholesale/Other n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Water Capital Investment RevenueIn-City - Less than 3 inches $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922Outside - Less than 3 inches 23,062 23,062 23,062 23,062 23,062Meters > 3 inches 208,468 208,468 208,468 208,468 208,468Wholesale/Other 0 0 0 0 0Total $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452

Cost to be Recovered from Volumetric ChargeIn-City - Less than 3 inches $3,437,772 $3,427,184 $3,400,638 $3,369,975 $3,344,551Outside - Less than 3 inches 48,267 47,410 46,137 44,748 43,429Meters > 3 inches 749,764 772,125 783,771 795,565 808,530Wholesale/Other 1,814,029 1,861,508 1,889,863 1,918,896 1,950,219Total $6,049,832 $6,108,227 $6,120,409 $6,129,184 $6,146,729

In City Volume consumed at Proposed Blocks0-2,000 gallons 26% 26% 26% 26% 26%2,001-10,000 gallons 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%10,001-25,000 gallons 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%25,001-50,000 gallons 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%>50,000 gallons 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

Outside Volume consumed at Proposed Blocks0-2,000 gallons 19% 19% 19% 19% 19%2,001-10,000 gallons 31% 31% 31% 31% 31%10,001-25,000 gallons 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%25,001-50,000 gallons 7% 7% 7% 7% 7%>50,000 gallons 31% 31% 31% 31% 31%

In City Volume consumed at Propose Elasticity0-2,000 gallons 0% 357,913 357,913 357,913 357,913 357,9132,001-10,000 gallons 0% 562,007 562,007 562,007 562,007 562,00710,001-25,000 gallons 1% 212,067 212,067 212,067 212,067 212,06725,001-50,000 gallons 3% 103,273 103,273 103,273 103,273 103,273>50,000 gallons 5% 153,581 153,581 153,581 153,581 153,581

Outside Volume consumed at Propos Elasticity0-2,000 gallons 0% 5,201 5,201 5,201 5,201 5,2012,001-10,000 gallons 0% 8,465 8,465 8,465 8,465 8,46510,001-25,000 gallons 1% 3,265 3,265 3,265 3,265 3,26525,001-50,000 gallons 3% 1,792 1,792 1,792 1,792 1,792>50,000 gallons 5% 7,904 7,904 7,904 7,904 7,904

Page 3/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Volumetric RatesIn City Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons n/a 5.5% 5.5% 5.5% 5.5%

0-2,000 gallons $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.002,001-10,000 gallons 3.33 3.51 3.70 3.90 4.1110,001-25,000 gallons 3.66 3.86 4.07 4.29 4.5225,001-50,000 gallons 4.00 4.21 4.44 4.68 4.93>50,000 gallons 4.33 4.56 4.81 5.07 5.34

Outside Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons0-2,000 gallons $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.002,001-10,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.8310,001-25,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.8325,001-50,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.85 6.16>50,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 6.01 6.34 6.68

5.5% 5.5% 5.5% 5.5%Meters > 3 inches Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $3.33 $3.51 $3.70 $3.90 $4.11

Wholesale Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons Assumes no change to Wholesale RatesStrike Axe 3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95City of Dewey 2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25Osage Water District #1 3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75Wash County Rural Water Dis 3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34Wash County Rural Water Dis 4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07Minnesota Water District 3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33Town of Ochelata 3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76Ramona Public Works 3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32

Page 4/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Annual Volumetric Revenue

In City Volumetric Revenue per 1,000 gallons0-2,000 gallons $0 $0 $0 $0 $02,001-10,000 gallons 1,871,484 1,972,645 2,079,426 2,191,828 2,309,84910,001-25,000 gallons 776,166 818,579 863,113 909,768 958,54425,001-50,000 gallons 413,094 434,781 458,534 483,320 509,138>50,000 gallons 665,005 700,329 738,724 778,655 820,122Total $3,725,749 $3,926,335 $4,139,798 $4,363,571 $4,597,653

Outside Volumetric Revenue per 1,000 gallons0-2,000 gallons $0 $0 $0 $0 $02,001-10,000 gallons 49,350 49,350 49,350 49,350 49,35010,001-25,000 gallons 19,037 19,037 19,037 19,037 19,03725,001-50,000 gallons 10,445 10,445 10,445 10,481 11,036>50,000 gallons 46,083 46,083 47,506 50,114 52,801

$124,915 $124,915 $126,338 $128,982 $132,225

Meters > 3 inches Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $816,705 $860,851 $907,450 $956,501 $1,008,005

Wholesale Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $934,082 $934,082 $934,082 $934,082 $934,082

Total Volumetric Rate Revenue $5,601,451 $5,846,183 $6,107,668 $6,383,136 $6,671,96592.6% 95.7% 99.8% 104.1% 108.5%

Revenue Requirement

Total Revenue Requirement $10,429,385 $10,619,620 $10,769,764 $10,923,322 $11,090,405

Minimum Bill Revenue $2,956,011 $3,088,329 $3,227,544 $3,373,658 $3,524,537Volumetric Revenue $5,601,451 $5,846,183 $6,107,668 $6,383,136 $6,671,965Capital Fee Revenue $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452Total Revenue Collected $9,980,914 $10,357,963 $10,758,664 $11,180,247 $11,619,955

Over (Under) Recovery ($448,471) ($261,657) ($11,100) $256,924 $529,550

Page 5/5



Rate Design StudySCENARIO 1

FINAL8/20/2014


1 EXPENSES2 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund13 Water Plant14 720 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $584,000 $597,432 $611,173 $625,230 $639,610 $654,32115 720 51120 OVERTIME 29,000 29,667 30,349 31,047 31,761 32,49216 720 51130 FICA 45,000 46,035 47,094 48,177 49,285 50,41917 720 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 134,583 144,004 154,084 164,870 176,411 188,76018 720 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 88,000 90,024 92,095 94,213 96,380 98,59619 720 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 9,000 9,207 9,419 9,635 9,857 10,08420 720 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 2,577 2,757 2,950 3,157 3,378 3,61421 720 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 0 0 0 022 720 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 8,800 9,002 9,209 9,421 9,638 9,86023 720 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 560,000 572,880 586,056 599,536 613,325 627,43124 720 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 25,736 26,328 26,933 27,553 28,186 28,83525 720 52510 OTHER SERVICES 130,000 132,990 136,049 139,178 142,379 145,65426 720 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 174,000 178,002 182,096 186,284 190,569 194,95227 720 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 1,500 1,535 1,570 1,606 1,643 1,68128 720 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,600 1,637 1,674 1,713 1,752 1,79329 720 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 860,000 879,780 900,015 920,715 941,892 963,55530 720 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 4,320 4,419 4,521 4,625 4,731 4,84031 720 53510 FUEL 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20432 720 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 50,000 51,150 52,326 53,530 54,761 56,02133 720 55920 BUILDINGS & STRUCTU 0 0 0 0 0 034 720 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 0 0 0 0 035 WW Reuse Operation 0 0 0 5,000 5,115 5,23336 Copan Pumping Costs 0 0 0 0 0 037 Copan Water Rights 0 0 0 0 0 038 Copan O&M Expense - Corps Fee 0 0 0 0 0 039 Water Admin40 725 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $161,000 $164,703 $168,491 $172,366 $176,331 $180,38741 725 51120 OVERTIME 0 0 0 0 0 042 725 51130 FICA 13,000 13,299 13,605 13,918 14,238 14,56543 725 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 26,917 28,801 30,817 32,974 35,283 37,75244 725 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 37,000 37,851 38,722 39,612 40,523 41,45545 725 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 0 0 0 0 0 046 725 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 2,000 2,046 2,093 2,141 2,190 2,24147 725 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 048 725 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 12,500 12,788 13,082 13,382 13,690 14,00549 725 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 30,739 31,446 32,169 32,909 33,666 34,44050 725 52510 OTHER SERVICES 6,300 6,445 6,593 6,745 6,900 7,05951 725 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 500 512 523 535 548 56052 725 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 0 0 0 0 053 725 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,200 1,228 1,256 1,285 1,314 1,34454 725 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,500 4,604 4,709 4,818 4,929 5,04255 725 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 0 056 725 53510 FUEL 750 767 785 803 821 84057 725 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 500 512 523 535 548 56058 Water Distribution59 730 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $782,000 $799,986 $818,386 $837,209 $856,464 $876,16360 730 51120 OVERTIME 46,000 47,058 48,140 49,248 50,380 51,53961 730 51130 FICA 60,000 61,380 62,792 64,236 65,713 67,22562 730 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 179,444 192,005 205,445 219,827 235,214 251,67963 730 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 121,000 123,783 126,630 129,542 132,522 135,57064 730 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20465 730 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 76,929 78,698 80,508 82,360 84,254 86,19266 730 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 0 0 0 067 730 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 9,275 9,488 9,707 9,930 10,158 10,39268 730 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 0 0 0 0 0 069 730 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 7,000 7,161 7,326 7,494 7,667 7,84370 730 52510 OTHER SERVICES 2,150 2,199 2,250 2,302 2,355 2,40971 730 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 10,400 10,639 10,884 11,134 11,390 11,65272 730 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 6,000 6,138 6,279 6,424 6,571 6,72273 730 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 074 730 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 6,175 6,317 6,462 6,611 6,763 6,91975 730 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 6,200 6,343 6,488 6,638 6,790 6,94776 730 53510 FUEL 47,500 48,593 49,710 50,853 52,023 53,22077 730 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 240,000 245,520 251,167 256,944 262,854 268,899

Page 1/2




FINAL8/20/2014



106 740 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES $5,000 $5,115 $5,233 $5,353 $5,476 $5,602107 740 52910 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - INT 1,700,000 1,631,634 1,568,520 1,512,786 1,455,620 1,396,530108 740 52911 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 1,750,000 1,934,852 1,631,783 1,679,744 1,727,573 1,785,664109 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - INT 0 0 0 105,672 103,436 101,135110 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 0 0 0 75,526 77,762 80,064120 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $3,455,000 $3,571,601 $3,205,535 $3,379,081 $3,369,867 $3,368,994121122 CASH-FUNDED123 Cash-Funded CIP $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200124125 SUBTOTAL - CIP $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200126127 TOTAL EXPENSES $10,979,581 $11,252,938 $11,048,407 $11,393,662 $11,556,252 $11,732,574128129 REVENUES130 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund131 0 43115 FEMA GRANTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0132 0 44142 PRINT,COPIES & FAX 200 205 209 214 219 224148 SUBTOTAL - FUND 510 $200 $205 $209 $214 $219 $224149150 FUND 715 - BMA Water154 0 44613 SERVICE ORDER FEES $42,805 $43,790 $44,797 $45,827 $46,881 $47,959155 0 44614 DELINQUENT SERVICE FEES 66,368 67,894 69,456 71,054 72,688 74,360156 0 44615 WATER TAP FEES 51,643 52,831 54,046 55,289 56,561 57,861157 0 44618 OTHER WATER FEES 929 950 972 995 1,017 1,041158 0 44619 LATE PENALTY 200,001 204,601 209,307 214,121 219,046 224,084165 0 49454 WWCIF 255,242 255,242 0 0 0 0166 0 49710 BMA - WASTEWATER 148,040 148,040 0 0 0 0167 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $765,028 $773,348 $378,578 $387,285 $396,193 $405,305168169 TOTAL REVENUES $765,228 $773,553 $378,787 $387,499 $396,412 $405,529170171 Revenue Requirement $10,214,353 $10,479,385 $10,669,620 $11,006,163 $11,159,840 $11,327,045

Page 2/2




FINAL8/20/2014

WATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Scenario 1Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Rates FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019



Connection CountIn-City - Less than 3 inches

5/8" 14,090 14,090 14,090 14,090 14,0901" 997 997 997 997 997

1 1/2" 99 99 99 99 992" 106 106 106 106 106

Outside - Less than 3 inches5/8" 230 230 230 230 2301" 36 36 36 36 36

1 1/2" 0 0 0 0 02" 5 5 5 5 5

Meters > 3 inches3" 22 22 22 22 224" 9 9 9 9 96" 3 3 3 3 3

Hydrants 17 17 17 17 17

Water Consumption (1,000 gallons)In-City - Less than 3 inches 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262Outside - Less than 3 inches 27,131 27,131 27,131 27,131 27,131Meters > 3 inches 245,257 245,257 245,257 245,257 245,257Wholesale/Other 57,571 57,571 57,571 57,571 57,571Strike Axe 28,715 28,715 28,715 28,715 28,715City of Dewey 212,701 212,701 212,701 212,701 212,701Osage Water District #1 28,075 28,075 28,075 28,075 28,075Wash County Rural Water Dist #2 48,106 48,106 48,106 48,106 48,106Wash County Rural Water Dist #5 2,028 2,028 2,028 2,028 2,028Minnesota Water District 914 914 914 914 914Town of Ochelata 3,224 3,224 3,224 3,224 3,224Ramona Public Works 15,875 15,875 15,875 15,875 15,875Total Volume Billed 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859

Page 1/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Minimum BillRates per Month - In City 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5%

5/8" $12.19 $12.74 $13.31 $13.91 $14.54 $15.191" $21.73 31.85 33.28 34.78 36.35 37.98

1 1/2" $33.60 63.70 66.55 69.55 72.70 75.952" $47.35 101.92 106.48 111.28 116.32 121.523" $72.66 191.10 199.65 208.65 218.10 227.854" $135.16 318.50 332.75 347.75 363.50 379.756" $256.88 637.00 665.50 695.50 727.00 759.508" $485.39 1,019.20 1,064.80 1,112.80 1,163.20 1,215.20

Rates per Month - Outside City5/8" $12.19 $15.93 $16.64 $17.39 $18.18 $18.991" $21.73 39.81 41.60 43.48 45.44 47.48

1 1/2" $33.60 79.63 83.19 86.94 90.88 94.942" $47.35 127.40 133.10 139.10 145.40 151.903" $72.66 238.88 249.56 260.81 272.63 284.814" $135.16 398.13 415.94 434.69 454.38 474.696" $256.88 796.25 831.88 869.38 908.75 949.388" $485.39 1,274.00 1,331.00 1,391.00 1,454.00 1,519.00

Annual Minimum Bill RevenueIn-City - Less than 3 inches

5/8" $2,154,079 $2,250,455 $2,351,903 $2,458,423 $2,568,3251" 381,053 398,162 416,108 434,891 454,393

1 1/2" 75,676 79,061 82,625 86,368 90,2292" 129,642 135,443 141,548 147,959 154,573

Outside - Less than 3 inches5/8" $43,953 $45,920 $47,990 $50,163 $52,4061" 17,199 17,971 18,781 19,629 20,509

1 1/2" 0 0 0 0 02" 7,644 7,986 8,346 8,724 9,114

Meters > 3 inches3" $50,450 $52,708 $55,084 $57,578 $60,1524" 34,398 35,937 37,557 39,258 41,0136" 22,932 23,958 25,038 26,172 27,3428" 0 0 0 0 0

Hydrants $38,984 $40,729 $42,565 $44,492 $46,481Total Minimum Bill Revenue $2,956,011 $3,088,329 $3,227,544 $3,373,658 $3,524,537



Page 2/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Revenue Requirement to be Recovered from Volumetric ChargesWater Capital Investment Fee, per 1,000 gallons

In-City - Less than 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85Outside - Less than 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85Meters > 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85Wholesale/Other n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Water Capital Investment RevenueIn-City - Less than 3 inches $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922Outside - Less than 3 inches 23,062 23,062 23,062 23,062 23,062Meters > 3 inches 208,468 208,468 208,468 208,468 208,468Wholesale/Other 0 0 0 0 0Total $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452

Cost to be Recovered from Volumetric ChargeIn-City - Less than 3 inches $3,474,285 $3,463,714 $3,561,716 $3,531,133 $3,505,790Outside - Less than 3 inches 48,955 48,099 49,216 47,829 46,512Meters > 3 inches 754,412 776,766 809,599 821,407 834,388Wholesale/Other 1,821,994 1,869,463 1,935,036 1,964,093 1,995,440Total $6,099,646 $6,158,041 $6,355,568 $6,364,462 $6,382,129

In City Volume consumed at Proposed Blocks0-2,000 gallons 26% 26% 26% 26% 26%2,001-10,000 gallons 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%10,001-25,000 gallons 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%25,001-50,000 gallons 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%>50,000 gallons 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

Outside Volume consumed at Proposed Blocks0-2,000 gallons 19% 19% 19% 19% 19%2,001-10,000 gallons 31% 31% 31% 31% 31%10,001-25,000 gallons 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%25,001-50,000 gallons 7% 7% 7% 7% 7%>50,000 gallons 31% 31% 31% 31% 31%

In City Volume consumed at Propose Elasticity0-2,000 gallons 0% 357,913 357,913 357,913 357,913 357,9132,001-10,000 gallons 0% 562,007 562,007 562,007 562,007 562,00710,001-25,000 gallons 1% 212,067 212,067 212,067 212,067 212,06725,001-50,000 gallons 3% 103,273 103,273 103,273 103,273 103,273>50,000 gallons 5% 153,581 153,581 153,581 153,581 153,581

Outside Volume consumed at Propos Elasticity0-2,000 gallons 0% 5,201 5,201 5,201 5,201 5,2012,001-10,000 gallons 0% 8,465 8,465 8,465 8,465 8,46510,001-25,000 gallons 1% 3,265 3,265 3,265 3,265 3,26525,001-50,000 gallons 3% 1,792 1,792 1,792 1,792 1,792>50,000 gallons 5% 7,904 7,904 7,904 7,904 7,904

Page 3/5




FINAL8/20/2014


Volumetric RatesIn City Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons n/a 5.5% 5.5% 5.5% 5.5%

0-2,000 gallons $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.002,001-10,000 gallons 3.45 3.64 3.84 4.05 4.2710,001-25,000 gallons 3.80 4.00 4.22 4.46 4.7025,001-50,000 gallons 4.14 4.37 4.61 4.86 5.12>50,000 gallons 4.49 4.73 4.99 5.27 5.55

Outside Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons0-2,000 gallons $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.002,001-10,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.8310,001-25,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.8825,001-50,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 6.08 6.40>50,000 gallons 5.83 5.91 6.24 6.59 6.94

n/a 5.5% 5.5% 5.5% 5.5%Meters > 3 inches Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $3.45 $3.64 $3.84 $4.05 $4.27

Wholesale Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons Assumes no change to Wholesale RatesStrike Axe 3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95City of Dewey 2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25Osage Water District #1 3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75Wash County Rural Water Dis 3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34Wash County Rural Water Dis 4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07Minnesota Water District 3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33Town of Ochelata 3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76Ramona Public Works 3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32

Page 4/5




FINAL8/20/2014



In City Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons0-2,000 gallons $0 $0 $0 $0 $02,001-10,000 gallons 1,938,925 2,045,706 2,158,108 2,276,129 2,399,77110,001-25,000 gallons 805,855 848,269 894,923 945,820 996,71625,001-50,000 gallons 427,552 451,305 476,091 501,909 528,760>50,000 gallons 689,578 726,438 766,369 809,371 852,374Total $3,861,911 $4,071,718 $4,295,491 $4,533,229 $4,777,621

Outside Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons0-2,000 gallons $0 $0 $0 $0 $02,001-10,000 gallons 49,350 49,350 49,350 49,350 49,35010,001-25,000 gallons 19,037 19,037 19,037 19,037 19,20125,001-50,000 gallons 10,445 10,445 10,445 10,893 11,466>50,000 gallons 46,083 46,715 49,324 52,090 54,857

$124,915 $125,547 $128,156 $131,370 $134,873

Meters > 3 inches Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $846,136 $892,735 $941,786 $993,290 $1,047,246


Total Volumetric Rate Revenue $5,767,043 $6,024,081 $6,299,514 $6,591,971 $6,893,822

Revenue Requirement


Minimum Bill Revenue $2,956,011 $3,088,329 $3,227,544 $3,373,658 $3,524,537Volumetric Revenue $5,767,043 $6,024,081 $6,299,514 $6,591,971 $6,893,822Capital Fee Revenue $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452Total Revenue Collected $10,146,506 $10,535,862 $10,950,510 $11,389,081 $11,841,812

Over (Under) Recovery ($332,878) ($133,758) ($55,652) $229,241 $514,766

Page 5/5




FINAL8/20/2014


1 EXPENSES2 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund13 Water Plant14 720 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $584,000 $597,432 $611,173 $625,230 $639,610 $654,32115 720 51120 OVERTIME 29,000 29,667 30,349 31,047 31,761 32,49216 720 51130 FICA 45,000 46,035 47,094 48,177 49,285 50,41917 720 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 134,583 144,004 154,084 164,870 176,411 188,76018 720 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 88,000 90,024 92,095 94,213 96,380 98,59619 720 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 9,000 9,207 9,419 9,635 9,857 10,08420 720 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 2,577 2,757 2,950 3,157 3,378 3,61421 720 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 0 0 0 022 720 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 8,800 9,002 9,209 9,421 9,638 9,86023 720 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 560,000 572,880 586,056 599,536 613,325 627,43124 720 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 25,736 26,328 26,933 27,553 28,186 28,83525 720 52510 OTHER SERVICES 130,000 132,990 136,049 139,178 142,379 145,65426 720 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 174,000 178,002 182,096 186,284 190,569 194,95227 720 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 1,500 1,535 1,570 1,606 1,643 1,68128 720 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,600 1,637 1,674 1,713 1,752 1,79329 720 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 860,000 879,780 900,015 920,715 941,892 963,55530 720 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 4,320 4,419 4,521 4,625 4,731 4,84031 720 53510 FUEL 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20432 720 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 50,000 51,150 52,326 53,530 54,761 56,02133 720 55920 BUILDINGS & STRUCTU 0 0 0 0 0 034 720 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 0 0 0 0 035 WW Reuse Operation 0 0 0 5,000 5,115 5,23336 Copan Pumping Costs 0 0 0 0 15,000 15,34537 Copan Water Rights 0 0 0 62,500 62,500 62,50038 Copan O&M Expense - Corps Fee 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 50,00039 Water Admin40 725 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $161,000 $164,703 $168,491 $172,366 $176,331 $180,38741 725 51120 OVERTIME 0 0 0 0 0 042 725 51130 FICA 13,000 13,299 13,605 13,918 14,238 14,56543 725 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 26,917 28,801 30,817 32,974 35,283 37,75244 725 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 37,000 37,851 38,722 39,612 40,523 41,45545 725 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 0 0 0 0 0 046 725 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 2,000 2,046 2,093 2,141 2,190 2,24147 725 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 048 725 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 12,500 12,788 13,082 13,382 13,690 14,00549 725 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 30,739 31,446 32,169 32,909 33,666 34,44050 725 52510 OTHER SERVICES 6,300 6,445 6,593 6,745 6,900 7,05951 725 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 500 512 523 535 548 56052 725 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 0 0 0 0 053 725 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,200 1,228 1,256 1,285 1,314 1,34454 725 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,500 4,604 4,709 4,818 4,929 5,04255 725 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 0 056 725 53510 FUEL 750 767 785 803 821 84057 725 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 500 512 523 535 548 560

Water Distribution58 730 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $782,000 $799,986 $818,386 $837,209 $856,464 $876,16359 730 51120 OVERTIME 46,000 47,058 48,140 49,248 50,380 51,53960 730 51130 FICA 60,000 61,380 62,792 64,236 65,713 67,22561 730 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 179,444 192,005 205,445 219,827 235,214 251,67962 730 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 121,000 123,783 126,630 129,542 132,522 135,57063 730 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20464 730 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 76,929 78,698 80,508 82,360 84,254 86,19265 730 51180 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP. 0 0 0 0 0 066 730 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 9,275 9,488 9,707 9,930 10,158 10,39267 730 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 0 0 0 0 0 068 730 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 7,000 7,161 7,326 7,494 7,667 7,84369 730 52510 OTHER SERVICES 2,150 2,199 2,250 2,302 2,355 2,40970 730 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 10,400 10,639 10,884 11,134 11,390 11,65271 730 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 6,000 6,138 6,279 6,424 6,571 6,72272 730 53210 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 073 730 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 6,175 6,317 6,462 6,611 6,763 6,91974 730 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 6,200 6,343 6,488 6,638 6,790 6,94775 730 53510 FUEL 47,500 48,593 49,710 50,853 52,023 53,22076 730 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 240,000 245,520 251,167 256,944 262,854 268,899

Page 1/2




FINAL8/20/2014



105 740 52210 FINANCIAL SERVICES $5,000 $5,115 $5,233 $5,353 $5,476 $5,602106 740 52910 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - INT 1,700,000 1,631,634 1,568,520 1,512,786 1,455,620 1,396,530107 740 52911 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 1,750,000 1,934,852 1,631,783 1,679,744 1,727,573 1,785,664108 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - INT 0 0 0 105,672 722,168 707,622109 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 0 0 0 75,526 441,095 455,641119 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $3,455,000 $3,571,601 $3,205,535 $3,379,081 $4,351,932 $4,351,059120121 CASH-FUNDED122 Cash-Funded CIP $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200123124 SUBTOTAL - CIP $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200 $1,439,200125126 TOTAL EXPENSES $10,979,581 $11,252,938 $11,048,407 $11,510,662 $12,670,917 $12,847,598127128 REVENUES129 FUND 510 - Water Operating Fund130 0 43115 FEMA GRANTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0131 0 44142 PRINT,COPIES & FAX 200 205 209 214 219 224147 SUBTOTAL - FUND 510 $200 $205 $209 $214 $219 $224148149 FUND 715 - BMA Water153 0 44613 SERVICE ORDER FEES $42,805 $43,790 $44,797 $45,827 $46,881 $47,959154 0 44614 DELINQUENT SERVICE FEES 66,368 67,894 69,456 71,054 72,688 74,360155 0 44615 WATER TAP FEES 51,643 52,831 54,046 55,289 56,561 57,861156 0 44618 OTHER WATER FEES 929 950 972 995 1,017 1,041157 0 44619 LATE PENALTY 200,001 204,601 209,307 214,121 219,046 224,084164 0 49454 WWCIF 255,242 255,242 0 0 0 0165 0 49710 BMA - WASTEWATER 148,040 148,040 0 0 0 0166 SUBTOTAL - FUND 715 $765,028 $773,348 $378,578 $387,285 $396,193 $405,305167168 TOTAL REVENUES $765,228 $773,553 $378,787 $387,499 $396,412 $405,529169170 Revenue Requirement $10,214,353 $10,479,385 $10,669,620 $11,123,163 $12,274,505 $12,442,069

Page 2/2

Schedule 7

Example Rates - WaterCity of Bartlesville, OK


Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 2

FINAL

8/20/2014

WATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Scenario 2Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Rates FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019



Connection Count

In-City - Less than 3 inches

5/8" 14,090 14,090 14,090 14,090 14,090

1" 997 997 997 997 997

1 1/2" 99 99 99 99 99

2" 106 106 106 106 106

Outside - Less than 3 inches

5/8" 230 230 230 230 230

1" 36 36 36 36 36

1 1/2" 0 0 0 0 0

2" 5 5 5 5 5

Meters > 3 inches

3" 22 22 22 22 22

4" 9 9 9 9 9

6" 3 3 3 3 3

Hydrants 17 17 17 17 17

Water Consumption (1,000 gallons)

In-City - Less than 3 inches 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262 1,402,262

Outside - Less than 3 inches 27,131 27,131 27,131 27,131 27,131

Meters > 3 inches 245,257 245,257 245,257 245,257 245,257

Wholesale/Other 57,571 57,571 57,571 57,571 57,571

Strike Axe 28,715 28,715 28,715 28,715 28,715

City of Dewey 212,701 212,701 212,701 212,701 212,701

Osage Water District #1 28,075 28,075 28,075 28,075 28,075

Wash County Rural Water Dist #2 48,106 48,106 48,106 48,106 48,106

Wash County Rural Water Dist #5 2,028 2,028 2,028 2,028 2,028

Minnesota Water District 914 914 914 914 914

Town of Ochelata 3,224 3,224 3,224 3,224 3,224

Ramona Public Works 15,875 15,875 15,875 15,875 15,875

Total Volume Billed 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859 2,071,859

Page 1/5

Schedule 7



Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 2

FINAL

8/20/2014



Minimum Bill

Rates per Month - In City 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5%

5/8" $12.19 $13.35 $14.62 $16.01 $17.53 $19.20

1" $21.73 33.38 36.55 40.03 43.83 48.00

1 1/2" $33.60 66.75 73.10 80.05 87.65 96.00

2" $47.35 106.80 116.96 128.08 140.24 153.60

3" $72.66 200.25 219.30 240.15 262.95 288.00

4" $135.16 333.75 365.50 400.25 438.25 480.00

6" $256.88 667.50 731.00 800.50 876.50 960.00

8" $485.39 1,068.00 1,169.60 1,280.80 1,402.40 1,536.00

Rates per Month - Outside City

5/8" $12.19 $16.69 $18.28 $20.01 $21.91 $24.00

1" $21.73 41.73 45.69 50.04 54.79 60.00

1 1/2" $33.60 83.44 91.38 100.06 109.56 120.00

2" $47.35 133.50 146.20 160.10 175.30 192.00

3" $72.66 250.31 274.13 300.19 328.69 360.00

4" $135.16 417.19 456.88 500.31 547.81 600.00

6" $256.88 834.38 913.75 1,000.63 1,095.63 1,200.00

8" $485.39 1,335.00 1,462.00 1,601.00 1,753.00 1,920.00

Annual Minimum Bill Revenue

In-City - Less than 3 inches

5/8" $2,257,218 $2,471,950 $2,706,971 $2,963,972 $3,246,336

1" 399,358 437,284 478,919 524,382 574,272

1 1/2" 79,299 86,843 95,099 104,128 114,048

2" 135,850 148,773 162,918 178,385 195,379

Outside - Less than 3 inches

5/8" $46,058 $50,439 $55,235 $60,479 $66,240

1" 18,025 19,737 21,616 23,668 25,920

1 1/2" 0 0 0 0 0

2" 8,010 8,772 9,606 10,518 11,520

Meters > 3 inches

3" $52,866 $57,895 $63,400 $69,419 $76,032

4" 36,045 39,474 43,227 47,331 51,840

6" 24,030 26,316 28,818 31,554 34,560

8" 0 0 0 0 0

Hydrants $40,851 $44,737 $48,991 $53,642 $58,752

Total Minimum Bill Revenue $3,097,610 $3,392,220 $3,714,799 $4,067,478 $4,454,899



Page 2/5

Schedule 7



Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 2

FINAL

8/20/2014



Revenue Requirement to be Recovered from Volumetric Charges

Water Capital Investment Fee, per 1,000 gallons

In-City - Less than 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85

Outside - Less than 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85

Meters > 3 inches $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85

Wholesale/Other n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Water Capital Investment Revenue

In-City - Less than 3 inches $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922 $1,191,922


Meters > 3 inches 208,468 208,468 208,468 208,468 208,468

Wholesale/Other 0 0 0 0 0

Total $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452

Cost to be Recovered from Volumetric Charge

In-City - Less than 3 inches $3,343,011 $3,181,984 $3,188,996 $3,633,444 $3,389,055


Meters > 3 inches 749,251 765,683 805,636 923,261 927,654

Wholesale/Other 1,821,994 1,869,463 1,957,463 2,185,823 2,217,239

Total $5,959,914 $5,858,158 $5,991,500 $6,788,533 $6,573,137

In City Volume consumed at Proposed Blocks

0-2,000 gallons 26% 26% 26% 26% 26%

2,001-10,000 gallons 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%

10,001-25,000 gallons 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%

25,001-50,000 gallons 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%

>50,000 gallons 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

Outside Volume consumed at Proposed Blocks

0-2,000 gallons 19% 19% 19% 19% 19%

2,001-10,000 gallons 31% 31% 31% 31% 31%

10,001-25,000 gallons 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

25,001-50,000 gallons 7% 7% 7% 7% 7%

>50,000 gallons 31% 31% 31% 31% 31%

In City Volume consumed at Proposed BlocksElasticity

0-2,000 gallons 0% 357,913 357,913 357,913 357,913 357,913

2,001-10,000 gallons 0% 562,007 562,007 562,007 562,007 562,007

10,001-25,000 gallons 1% 212,067 212,067 212,067 212,067 212,067

25,001-50,000 gallons 3% 103,273 103,273 103,273 103,273 103,273

>50,000 gallons 5% 153,581 153,581 153,581 153,581 153,581

Outside Volume consumed at Proposed BlocksElasticity

0-2,000 gallons 0% 5,201 5,201 5,201 5,201 5,201

2,001-10,000 gallons 0% 8,465 8,465 8,465 8,465 8,465

10,001-25,000 gallons 1% 3,265 3,265 3,265 3,265 3,265

25,001-50,000 gallons 3% 1,792 1,792 1,792 1,792 1,792

>50,000 gallons 5% 7,904 7,904 7,904 7,904 7,904

Page 3/5

Schedule 7



Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 2

FINAL

8/20/2014



Volumetric Rates

In City Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons n/a 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%

0-2,000 gallons $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gallons 3.45 3.66 3.88 4.11 4.36

10,001-25,000 gallons 3.80 4.03 4.27 4.52 4.80

25,001-50,000 gallons 4.14 4.39 4.66 4.93 5.23

>50,000 gallons 4.49 4.76 5.04 5.34 5.67

Outside Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons

0-2,000 gallons $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2,001-10,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83

10,001-25,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 6.00

25,001-50,000 gallons 5.83 5.83 5.83 6.16 6.54

>50,000 gallons 5.83 5.95 6.30 6.68 7.09

n/a 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%

Meters > 3 inches Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $3.45 $3.66 $3.88 $4.11 $4.36

Wholesale Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons Assumes no change to Wholesale Rates

Strike Axe 3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95 $3.95

City of Dewey 2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25

Osage Water District #1 3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75 $3.75

Wash County Rural Water Dist #2 3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34 $3.34

Wash County Rural Water Dist #5 4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07 $4.07

Minnesota Water District 3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33 $3.33

Town of Ochelata 3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76 $3.76

Ramona Public Works 3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32 $3.32

Page 4/5

Schedule 7



Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 2

FINAL

8/20/2014




In City Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons

0-2,000 gallons $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2,001-10,000 gallons 1,938,925 2,056,946 2,180,588 2,309,849 2,450,351

10,001-25,000 gallons 805,855 854,631 905,527 958,544 1,017,922

25,001-50,000 gallons 427,552 453,371 481,254 509,138 540,120

>50,000 gallons 689,578 731,045 774,048 820,122 870,804

Total $3,861,911 $4,095,993 $4,341,417 $4,597,653 $4,879,198

Outside Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons

0-2,000 gallons $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2,001-10,000 gallons 49,350 49,350 49,350 49,350 49,350

10,001-25,000 gallons 19,037 19,037 19,037 19,037 19,592

25,001-50,000 gallons 10,445 10,445 10,445 11,036 11,717

>50,000 gallons 46,083 47,031 49,798 52,801 56,042

$124,915 $125,863 $128,630 $132,225 $136,702

Meters > 3 inches Volumetric Rate per 1,000 gallons $846,136 $897,640 $951,596 $1,008,005 $1,069,320


Total Volumetric Rate Revenue $5,767,043 $6,053,578 $6,355,725 $6,671,965 $7,019,301

96.8% 103.3% 106.1% 98.3% 106.8%

Revenue Requirement


Minimum Bill Revenue $3,097,610 $3,392,220 $3,714,799 $4,067,478 $4,454,899

Volumetric Revenue $5,767,043 $6,053,578 $6,355,725 $6,671,965 $7,019,301

Capital Fee Revenue $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452 $1,423,452

Total Revenue Collected $10,288,105 $10,869,250 $11,493,976 $12,162,896 $12,897,652

Over (Under) Recovery ($191,280) $199,630 $370,813 ($111,609) $455,583

Page 5/5

Schedule 8

Test Year - WastewaterCity of Bartlesville, OK


Rate Design Study

FINAL

8/20/14



1 FUND 509 - Wastewater Operating Fund

2 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS $0 General

3 0 46222 AMORT. PREM. / (DIS 0 General



6 0 49710 BMA-Sewer 0 General

7 Wastewater Plant

8 710 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA $420 $420 General



11 710 52710 OPERATIONAL SERVICE 2,040,600 2,040,600 General

12 710 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 0 0 General

13 710 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 0 0 Equip Fuel

14 710 55930 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 General

15 710 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 None

16 710 55960 VEHICLE & OFFROAD E 0 None

17 Wastewater Maintenance



20 715 51130 FICA 33,000 33,000 Salaries




24 715 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 8,291 8,291 Insurance


26 715 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 450 450 General

27 715 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 10,000 10,000 General



30 715 52810 INSURANCE & BONDS 0 Insurance

31 715 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 General



34 715 53510 FUEL 29,000 29,000 Equip Fuel


36 715 55930 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 General

37 715 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 Equip Fuel

38 900 59101 TRANSFER TO GENERAL 768,841 768,841 Calculated

39 900 59663 TRANSFER TO COLLISI 0 None

40 900 59670 TRANSFER TO STABILI 57,715 57,715 Calculated

41 900 59675 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL RESERVE 550,000 (550,000) 0 Calculated

42 900 59715 TRANSFER TO BMA-WAT 148,040 148,040 Calculated

43 950 58110 OPERATING RESERVES 57,715 57,715 Calculated

44 950 58120 COMPENSATED ABSENCE 15,942 15,942 Salaries

45 SUBTOTAL - FUND 590 $4,483,978 $3,933,978

46

1/3

Schedule 8



Rate Design Study

FINAL

8/20/14



47 FUND 710 - BMA Wastewater

48 0 44175 OTHER SERVICES $0 General

49 0 44411 WASTEWATER/SEWER FE 0 General

50 0 44412 SEWER SERVICE FEE 0 General

51 0 44413 SEWER TAP FEE 0 General

52 0 44416 DISCHARGE TESTING F 0 General

53 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS 0 General



56 0 47411 BAD DEBT COLLECTION 0 General

57 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT O 0 General

58 742 52910 DEBT SERVICE - INT $3,000 $3,000 Calculated

59 742 52911 DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 30,000 30,000 Calculated

60 900 59509 WASTEWATER OPERATIN 4,417,506 (4,417,506) 0 Calculated

61 SUBTOTAL - FUND 710 $33,000 $33,000

62

63 Wastewater Regulatory Fund

64 CWWTP $2,200,000 ($2,200,000) $0 None

65 Wastewater Maintenance 400,000 (400,000) 0 None

66 TRANSFER TO WATER 255,242 255,242 Calculated

67 SUBTOTAL - Wastewater Regulatory Fund $2,855,242 $255,242

68

69 REVENUES

70 FUND 509 - Wastewater Operating Fund


72 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS $0 0 General


74 0 47215 REPAIRS & REPLACEMENTS 0 0 General

75 0 47216 INSURANCE REIMBURSEMENT 0 General

76 0 47411 BAD DEBT COLLECTIONS 0 General

77 0 48211 SALE OF FIXED ASSETS 0 General

78 0 48222 SALE / SURPLUS PROPERTY 0 General

79 0 48511 REIMB.OPERATING EXPENSE 0 General

80 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT OBLIG 0 General

81 0 49710 BMA-Sewer 4,417,506 (4,417,506) 0 General

82 0 49715 BMA - WATER 0 General

83 SUBTOTAL - FUND 509 $0 $0

84

2/3

Schedule 8



Rate Design Study

FINAL

8/20/14



85 FUND 710 - BMA Wastewater


87 0 44411 WASTEWATER/SEWER FEE 3,312,452 (3,312,452) 0 General

88 0 44412 SEWER SERVICE FEE 534,458 (534,458) 0 General

89 0 44413 SEWER TAP FEE 5,319 5,319 General

90 0 44416 DISCHARGE TESTING FEE 3,671 3,671 General

91 0 46221 INVESTMENT EARNINGS 1,100 (1,100) 0 Calculated

92 0 47211 MISCELLANEOUS REVEN 0 General

93 0 47215 REPAIRS & REPLACEMENTS 0 General

94 0 47411 BAD DEBT COLLECTIONS 0 0 General

95 0 48411 NOTE OBLIGATION PROCEED 0 General

96 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT OBLIG 76,000 76,000 General

97 0 49509 WASTEWATER / SEWER 0 General

98 SUBTOTAL - FUND 710 $3,933,000 $84,990

99

100 Wastewater Regulatory Fund

101 WWCIF $1,400,000 ($1,400,000) $0 None

102 INTEREST AND INCOME 0 None

103 TRANSFER FROM WATER 0 None

104 SUBTOTAL - Wastewater Regulatory Fund $1,400,000 $0

105

106 Total WASTEWATER EXPENDITURES $7,372,220 $4,222,220

107 (Expenditures in Test Year Exclude CIP)

108 TOTAL WASTEWATER REVENUES $5,333,000 $850,218

109 (Revenues in Test Year Exclude Rate Revenue)

110 Over/(Under) Recovery ($2,039,220)

111

112 Wastewater Revenue Requirement $3,372,002

3/3

Schedule 9Revenue Requirement - Wastewater



FINAL8/20/2014

Revenue Requirement - WastewaterTest Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Year FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

1 EXPENSES2 FUND 509 - Wastewater Operating Fund

Wastewater Plant8 710 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA $420 $430 $440 $450 $460 $4719 710 52510 OTHER SERVICES 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,204

10 710 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 21,520 22,015 22,521 23,039 23,569 24,11111 710 52710 OPERATIONAL SERVICE 2,040,600 2,087,534 2,135,547 2,184,665 2,234,912 2,286,315

Wastewater Maintenance17 715 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $430,000 $439,890 $450,007 $460,358 $470,946 $481,77818 715 51120 OVERTIME 16,000 16,368 16,744 17,130 17,524 17,92719 715 51130 FICA 33,000 33,759 34,535 35,330 36,142 36,97420 715 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 98,694 105,603 112,995 120,904 129,368 138,42321 715 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 71,000 72,633 74,304 76,013 77,761 79,54922 715 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 7,000 7,161 7,326 7,494 7,667 7,84323 715 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 8,291 8,871 9,492 10,157 10,868 11,62924 715 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 8,000 8,184 8,372 8,565 8,762 8,96325 715 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 450 460 471 482 493 50426 715 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20427 715 52510 OTHER SERVICES 5,750 5,882 6,018 6,156 6,298 6,44228 715 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 40,000 40,920 41,861 42,824 43,809 44,81729 715 52810 INSURANCE & BONDS 0 0 0 0 0 030 715 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 0 0 0 0 031 715 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 11,800 12,071 12,349 12,633 12,924 13,22132 715 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 6,200 6,343 6,488 6,638 6,790 6,94733 715 53510 FUEL 29,000 29,667 30,349 31,047 31,761 32,49234 715 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 38,000 38,874 39,768 40,683 41,618 42,57635 715 55930 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 036 715 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 0 0 0 0 037 900 59101 TRANSFER TO GENERAL 768,841 768,841 768,841 768,841 768,841 768,84138 900 59663 TRANSFER TO COLLISI 0 0 0 0 0 039 900 59670 TRANSFER TO STABILI 57,715 59,142 60,610 62,120 63,672 65,26841 900 59715 TRANSFER TO BMA-WAT 148,040 148,040 0 0 0 042 950 58110 OPERATING RESERVES 57,715 59,142 60,610 62,120 63,672 65,26843 950 58120 COMPENSATED ABSENCE 15,942 16,309 16,684 17,067 17,460 17,86244 SUBTOTAL - FUND 590 $3,933,978 $4,008,600 $3,937,265 $4,016,126 $4,097,219 $4,180,6274546 FUND 710 - BMA Wastewater47 0 44175 OTHER SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $057 742 52910 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - INT 3,000 0 0 0 0 058 742 52911 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 30,000 0 0 0 0 059 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - INT 0 0 0 0 0 060 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 0 0 0 0 0 061 900 59509 WASTEWATER OPERATIN 0 0 0 0 0 062 SUBTOTAL - FUND 710 $33,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $06364 Wastewater Regulatory Fund65 CWWTP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $066 Wastewater Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 067 TRANSFER TO WATER 255,242 255,242 0 0 0 068 SUBTOTAL - Wastewater Regulatory Fund $255,242 $255,242 $0 $0 $0 $069

Page 1/2




FINAL8/20/2014


70 Cash-Funded CIP71 Cash-Funded CIP $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,80072 SUBTOTAL - CIP $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,8007374 TOTAL EXPENSES $5,645,020 $5,686,642 $5,360,065 $5,438,926 $5,520,019 $5,603,4277576 REVENUES77 FUND 509 - Wastewater Operating Fund90 SUBTOTAL - FUND 509 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $09192 FUND 710 - BMA Wastewater96 0 44413 SEWER TAP FEE $5,319 $5,441 $5,566 $5,695 $5,825 $5,95997 0 44416 DISCHARGE TESTING FEE 3,671 3,755 3,842 3,930 4,021 4,113103 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT OBLIG 76,000 77,748 79,536 81,366 83,237 85,151104 0 49509 WASTEWATER / SEWER 0 0 0 0 0 0105 SUBTOTAL - FUND 710 $84,990 $86,945 $88,944 $90,990 $93,083 $95,224112113 TOTAL REVENUES $84,990 $86,945 $88,944 $90,990 $93,083 $95,224114115 Revenue Requirement $5,560,030 $5,599,697 $5,271,120 $5,347,935 $5,426,936 $5,508,203

Page 2/2

Schedule 10

Example Rates - WastewaterCity of Bartlesville, OK


Rate Design Study

BASE CASE

FINAL

8/20/2014

WASTEWATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Base ScenarioCurrent Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5



Connection Count

Residential 14,010 14,010 14,010 14,010 14,010 14,010

Commercial 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256

Wholesale 1 1 1 1 1 1

Wastewater Annual Billable Flow (1,000 gal)

Residential 713,297 713,297 713,297 713,297 713,297 713,297

Commercial 352,564 352,564 352,564 352,564 352,564 352,564

Wholesale 13,992 13,992 13,992 13,992 13,992 13,992

Minimum Bills

Rates per Month 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Residential $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93

Commercial $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93

Wholesale $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93


Residential $492,592 $492,592 $492,592 $492,592 $492,592 $492,592

Commercial 44,161 44,161 44,161 44,161 44,161 44,161

Wholesale 35 35 35 35 35 35

Total Minimum Bill Revenue $536,797 $536,797 $536,797 $536,797 $536,797 $536,797

Total Debt Service 33,000 0 0 0 0 0

Minimum Bill Recovery 9.7% 9.6% 10.2% 10.0% 9.9% 9.7%

RR to be Recovered by Volumetric Rates

$5,023,233 $5,062,900 $4,734,324 $4,811,139 $4,890,140 $4,971,406

Page 1/2

Schedule 10



Rate Design Study

BASE CASE

FINAL

8/20/2014

WASTEWATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Base ScenarioCurrent Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5


Volumetric Rate - Current Rate Structure

Price per 1,000 gal 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5%

Residential $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Commercial $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Wholesale $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Sewer Capital Invest Fee 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%

Residential $1.25 $1.28 $1.31 $1.34 $1.37 $1.40

Commercial $1.25 $1.28 $1.31 $1.34 $1.37 $1.40

Wholesale $1.25 $1.28 $1.31 $1.34 $1.37 $1.40


Residential $2,168,423 $2,204,088 $2,239,753 $2,275,417 $2,311,082 $2,346,747

Commercial 1,071,795 1,089,423 1,107,051 1,124,679 1,142,307 1,159,936

Wholesale 42,536 43,235 43,935 44,634 45,334 46,034

$3,282,753 $3,336,746 $3,390,738 $3,444,731 $3,498,724 $3,552,716

Annual Capital Fee Revenue

Residential $891,621 $913,020 $934,419 $955,818 $977,217 $998,616

Commercial 440,705 451,282 461,859 472,436 483,013 493,590

Wholesale 17,490 17,910 18,330 18,749 19,169 19,589

$1,349,816 $1,382,212 $1,414,607 $1,447,003 $1,479,399 $1,511,794

Total Cash-Funded CIP $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800 $1,422,800

Volumetric Recovery 59.0% 59.6% 64.3% 64.4% 64.5% 64.5%

Capital Fee Recovery 24.3% 24.7% 26.8% 27.1% 27.3% 27.4%

Revenue Requirement

Total Revenue Requirement $5,560,030 $5,599,697 $5,271,120 $5,347,935 $5,426,936 $5,508,203

Minimum Bill Revenue $536,797 $536,797 $536,797 $536,797 $536,797 $536,797

Volumetric Revenue 3,282,753 3,336,746 3,390,738 3,444,731 3,498,724 3,552,716

Capital Fee Revenue 1,349,816 1,382,212 1,414,607 1,447,003 1,479,399 1,511,794

Total Revenue Collected $5,169,366 $5,255,754 $5,342,142 $5,428,531 $5,514,919 $5,601,307

Over (Under) Recovery ($390,664) ($343,943) $71,022 $80,595 $87,982 $93,104

Page 2/2




FINAL8/20/2014


1 EXPENSES2 FUND 509 - Wastewater Operating Fund

Wastewater Plant8 710 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA $420 $430 $440 $450 $460 $4719 710 52510 OTHER SERVICES 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20410 710 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 21,520 22,015 22,521 23,039 23,569 24,11111 710 52710 OPERATIONAL SERVICE 2,040,600 2,087,534 2,135,547 2,184,665 2,234,912 2,286,315

Wastewater Maintenance17 715 51110 REGULAR SALARIES $430,000 $439,890 $450,007 $460,358 $470,946 $481,77818 715 51120 OVERTIME 16,000 16,368 16,744 17,130 17,524 17,92719 715 51130 FICA 33,000 33,759 34,535 35,330 36,142 36,97420 715 51140 GROUP INSURANCE 98,694 105,603 112,995 120,904 129,368 138,42321 715 51150 GENERAL DB RETIREME 71,000 72,633 74,304 76,013 77,761 79,54922 715 51155 GENERAL DC RETIREME 7,000 7,161 7,326 7,494 7,667 7,84323 715 51170 WORKERS' COMPENSATI 8,291 8,871 9,492 10,157 10,868 11,62924 715 52110 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 8,000 8,184 8,372 8,565 8,762 8,96325 715 52310 UTILITIES/COMMUNICA 450 460 471 482 493 50426 715 52410 PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 10,000 10,230 10,465 10,706 10,952 11,20427 715 52510 OTHER SERVICES 5,750 5,882 6,018 6,156 6,298 6,44228 715 52610 MAINT & REPAIR SERV 40,000 40,920 41,861 42,824 43,809 44,81729 715 52810 INSURANCE & BONDS 0 0 0 0 0 030 715 53110 OFFICE EQUIP & SUPP 0 0 0 0 0 031 715 53310 GENERAL SUPPLIES 11,800 12,071 12,349 12,633 12,924 13,22132 715 53410 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 6,200 6,343 6,488 6,638 6,790 6,94733 715 53510 FUEL 29,000 29,667 30,349 31,047 31,761 32,49234 715 53610 MAINT & REPAIR MATE 38,000 38,874 39,768 40,683 41,618 42,57635 715 55930 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 036 715 55940 MACHINERY & EQUIPME 0 0 0 0 0 037 900 59101 TRANSFER TO GENERAL 768,841 768,841 768,841 768,841 768,841 768,84138 900 59663 TRANSFER TO COLLISI 0 0 0 0 0 039 900 59670 TRANSFER TO STABILI 57,715 59,142 60,610 62,120 63,672 65,26841 900 59715 TRANSFER TO BMA-WAT 148,040 148,040 0 0 0 042 950 58110 OPERATING RESERVES 57,715 59,142 60,610 62,120 63,672 65,26843 950 58120 COMPENSATED ABSENCE 15,942 16,309 16,684 17,067 17,460 17,86244 SUBTOTAL - FUND 590 $3,933,978 $4,008,600 $3,937,265 $4,016,126 $4,097,219 $4,180,6274546 FUND 710 - BMA Wastewater47 0 44175 OTHER SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $057 742 52910 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - INT 3,000 0 0 0 0 058 742 52911 EXISTING DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 30,000 0 0 0 0 059 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - INT 0 0 0 0 0 1,056,72060 PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE - PRIN 0 0 0 0 0 755,26361 900 59509 WASTEWATER OPERATIN 0 0 0 0 0 062 SUBTOTAL - FUND 710 $33,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,811,9836364 Wastewater Regulatory Fund65 CWWTP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $066 Wastewater Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 067 TRANSFER TO WATER 255,242 255,242 0 0 0 068 SUBTOTAL - Wastewater Regulatory Fund $255,242 $255,242 $0 $0 $0 $069

Page 1/2




FINAL8/20/2014


70 Cash-Funded CIP71 Cash-Funded CIP $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,80072 SUBTOTAL - CIP $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,800 $2,102,8007374 TOTAL EXPENSES $6,325,020 $6,366,642 $6,040,065 $6,118,926 $6,200,019 $8,095,4097576 REVENUES77 FUND 509 - Wastewater Operating Fund90 SUBTOTAL - FUND 509 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $09192 FUND 710 - BMA Wastewater96 0 44413 SEWER TAP FEE $5,319 $5,441 $5,566 $5,695 $5,825 $5,95997 0 44416 DISCHARGE TESTING FEE 3,671 3,755 3,842 3,930 4,021 4,113103 0 48611 REIMB.BY CONTRACT OBLIG 76,000 77,748 79,536 81,366 83,237 85,151104 0 49509 WASTEWATER / SEWER 0 0 0 0 0 0105 SUBTOTAL - FUND 710 $84,990 $86,945 $88,944 $90,990 $93,083 $95,224112113 TOTAL REVENUES $84,990 $86,945 $88,944 $90,990 $93,083 $95,224114115 Revenue Requirement $6,240,030 $6,279,697 $5,951,120 $6,027,935 $6,106,936 $8,000,186

Page 2/2

Schedule 12



Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 1

FINAL

8/20/2014

WASTEWATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Scenario 1Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5



Connection Count

Residential 14,010 14,010 14,010 14,010 14,010 14,010

Commercial 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256

Wholesale 1 1 1 1 1 1

Wastewater Annual Billable Flow (1,000 gal)

Residential 713,297 713,297 713,297 713,297 713,297 713,297

Commercial 352,564 352,564 352,564 352,564 352,564 352,564

Wholesale 13,992 13,992 13,992 13,992 13,992 13,992

Minimum Bills

Rates per Month

Residential $2.93 $4.33 $5.73 $7.13 $8.53 $9.93

Commercial $2.93 $4.33 $5.73 $7.13 $8.53 $9.93

Wholesale $2.93 $4.33 $5.73 $7.13 $8.53 $9.93


Residential $492,592 $727,960 $963,328 $1,198,696 $1,434,064 $1,669,432

Commercial 44,161 65,262 86,363 107,463 128,564 149,665

Wholesale 35 52 69 86 102 119

Total Minimum Bill Revenue $536,797 $793,286 $1,049,776 $1,306,266 $1,562,756 $1,819,246

Minimum Bill Recovery 8.6% 12.6% 17.6% 21.7% 25.6% 22.7%

Minimum Bill Revenue % of Debt Servicen/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 100.4%

RR to be Recovered by Volumetric Rates

$5,703,233 $5,486,411 $4,901,344 $4,721,669 $4,544,181 $6,180,940

Page 1/2

Schedule 12



Rate Design Study

SCENARIO 1

FINAL

8/20/2014

WASTEWATER Cost of Service - Example Rates | Scenario 1Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5


Volumetric Rate - Current Rate Structure

Price per 1,000 gal 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5%

Residential $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Commercial $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Wholesale $3.04 $3.09 $3.14 $3.19 $3.24 $3.29

Sewer Capital Invest Fee 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0%

Residential $1.25 $1.44 $1.66 $1.91 $2.20 $2.53

Commercial $1.25 $1.44 $1.66 $1.91 $2.20 $2.53

Wholesale $1.25 $1.44 $1.66 $1.91 $2.20 $2.53


Residential $2,168,423 $2,204,088 $2,239,753 $2,275,417 $2,311,082 $2,346,747

Commercial 1,071,795 1,089,423 1,107,051 1,124,679 1,142,307 1,159,936

Wholesale 42,536 43,235 43,935 44,634 45,334 46,034

$3,282,753 $3,336,746 $3,390,738 $3,444,731 $3,498,724 $3,552,716

Annual Capital Fee Revenue

Residential $891,621 $1,027,148 $1,184,073 $1,362,397 $1,569,253 $1,804,641

Commercial 440,705 507,692 585,256 673,397 775,641 891,987

Wholesale 17,490 20,148 23,227 26,725 30,782 35,400

$1,349,816 $1,554,988 $1,792,556 $2,062,519 $2,375,677 $2,732,028

Capital Fee Revenue as % of Cash Capital 64.2% 73.9% 85.2% 98.1% 113.0% 129.9%

Volumetric Recovery 52.6% 53.1% 57.0% 57.1% 57.3% 44.4%

Capital Fee Recovery 21.6% 24.8% 30.1% 34.2% 38.9% 34.1%

Revenue Requirement

Total Revenue Requirement $6,240,030 $6,279,697 $5,951,120 $6,027,935 $6,106,936 $8,000,186

Minimum Bill Revenue $536,797 $793,286 $1,049,776 $1,306,266 $1,562,756 $1,819,246

Volumetric Revenue 3,282,753 3,336,746 3,390,738 3,444,731 3,498,724 3,552,716

Capital Fee Revenue 1,349,816 1,554,988 1,792,556 2,062,519 2,375,677 2,732,028

Total Revenue Collected $5,169,366 $5,685,020 $6,233,071 $6,813,516 $7,437,156 $8,103,990

Over (Under) Recovery ($1,070,664) ($594,676) $281,950 $785,581 $1,330,220 $103,804

Page 2/2

City Hall, Council Chambers Mayor Tom Gorman 401 S. … · 2016-09-27 · 401 S. Johnstone Avenue...

Documents

Transcript of City Hall, Council Chambers Mayor Tom Gorman 401 S. … · 2016-09-27 · 401 S. Johnstone Avenue...