FINAL REPORT
MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW
Water Service – Gateway Region
Prepared for:
Local Agency Formation Commission for
Los Angeles County 700 North Central Avenue, Suite 350
Glendale, CA 91203
Prepared by:
Dudek and Associates, Inc. 605 Third Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
November 2005
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report TOC-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................1 2.0 AGENCY PROFILES ......................................................................................................................................8 3.0 ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................................................................42
3.1 Growth and Population .................................................................................................................42
3.1.1 Growth/Population Projections .....................................................................................42 3.2 Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies ........................................................................................44
3.2.1 Water Supply/Demand....................................................................................................45
3.2.2 Water System Infrastructure ..........................................................................................48 3.3 Financing Constraints and Opportunities...................................................................................57
3.3.1 Revenue Source and Funding .......................................................................................57
3.3.2 Revenues and Expenses Comparison ..........................................................................57 3.4 Cost Avoidance and Shared Facilities Opportunities ................................................................64 3.5 Management Efficiencies..............................................................................................................68 3.6 Rate Restructuring ........................................................................................................................71 3.7 Government Structure Options....................................................................................................75 3.8 Local Accountability and Governance ........................................................................................76
4.0 Determinations.............................................................................................................................................80 City of Cerritos...............................................................................................................................80 City of Compton.............................................................................................................................81 City of Downey...............................................................................................................................82 City of Huntington Park ................................................................................................................83 City of Lakewood...........................................................................................................................84 City of Long Beach........................................................................................................................85 City of Lynwood.............................................................................................................................87 City of Norwalk ..............................................................................................................................88 City of Paramount..........................................................................................................................89 City of Pico Rivera.........................................................................................................................90 City of Santa Fe Springs ...............................................................................................................91 City of Signal Hill ...........................................................................................................................92 City of South Gate .........................................................................................................................93
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report TOC-3
City of Vernon................................................................................................................................94 City of Whittier ...............................................................................................................................95 Central Basin Municipal Water District........................................................................................97 La Habra Heights County Water District .....................................................................................98 Orchard Dale Water District..........................................................................................................99 Pico Water District.......................................................................................................................101 Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District .............................................................................102 Water Replenishment District of Southern California..............................................................104
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 1
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Gateway Municipal Service Review study area encompasses the coastal plain area in the southeast portion of Los Angeles County. Western and Vermont Avenues generally form the western boundary, the Pacific Ocean lies to the south, Orange County forms the eastern boundary and SR-60 is to the north. This area overlies the Central Groundwater Basin, an adjudicated groundwater basin that has historically been overpumped. Land use in the study area is characterized by urban development, with a predominance of residential and commercial/industrial uses. The area is served by 21 public water agencies and multiple private water companies and water mutuals. The private water companies and mutuals are not under LAFCo purview. The area relies on a combination of groundwater, imported and recycled water for supply. SUMMARY OF DETERMINATIONS 1. Growth and Population The Gateway study area has an estimated population of 1,964,119 per SCAG 2004 projections. Growth through 2030 is expected to be slow to moderate with an average annual growth rate of approximately 0.65%. This would yield 13% growth over the next twenty years, which is less than the overall expected growth rate for Los Angeles County. Most agencies stated that their service areas were built-out and growth would come from infill and redevelopment. Redevelopment that replaces a former manufacturing use is not expected to result in increased water demand as manufacturing processes generally require significantly more water than residential or commercial demand. However, changes in densities from single family to multi-family residential may have a greater effect. 2. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies The water supply for the region is provided through a combination of imported water, groundwater extracted from the Central Groundwater Basin, and recycled water produced by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. The Central Basin is adjudicated, and each of the cities and retail special districts holds groundwater rights. Depending on their current infrastructure and demand, they are able to use this resource to meet all or a percentage of demand with imported water used to supplement supply. Some cities do not use imported water at all. In order to meet demand in the most cost effective manner, most of the agencies lease water rights as part of the mandatory water rights pool required by the judgment. Most of the municipalities are planning for new wells or the rehabilitation and improvement of existing wells and treatment/storage facilities.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 2
Groundwater quality is of some concern. The historic overpumping caused the groundwater levels to fall below sea level, which allowed for seawater intrusion. The Central Basin is protected by the Alamitos Barrier in Long Beach. The Water Replenishment District uses recycled water to maintain the barrier through an agreement with the Orange County Water District. Imported water is wholesaled by the Central Basin Municipal Water District (Central Basin MWD) and delivered to the agencies directly from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) system. Long Beach and Compton are also Metropolitan members and purchase imported water directly from that agency. Recycled water is produced by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts at the Los Coyotes Water Reclamation Plant in Cerritos and sold by the Central Basin MWD. It is available in a number of areas in the Gateway region. Overall, water supply is adequate to meet the future needs of the region provided imported water remains available. The agencies are collaborating on groundwater management and conjunctive use programs that will allow them to effectively maximize local resources while ensuring the sustainability and quality of the groundwater basin. Some of the agencies have Water System Master Plans and all have Capital Improvement Programs. They are being implemented based on available funding. Sativa-Los Angeles CWD is the only agency that does not have water meters. 3. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The cities are operating their water utilities as an enterprise activity such that revenues are expected to cover all water utility related expenses. However, escalating costs associated with personnel and benefits as well as cost increases for water purchases represent common financing constraints. Rate stabilization is a priority, and the agencies are not always able to pass on the full incremental cost increase within a given year. Some of the agencies are using financing mechanisms, such as loans, bonds or Certificates of Participation, to finance major capital improvements. Others are using a pay-as-you-go approach. Grant funding has been secured for some major projects. Some agencies have delayed capital improvements as a result of financial constraints.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 3
4 and 5. Cost-Avoidance Opportunities and Opportunities for Shared Facilities Most agencies are avoiding future costs through maximizing the use of local resources and limiting use of imported supply. The agencies each have planning documents that enable them to efficiently plan for operations and future system improvements. Agencies are sharing facilities where appropriate, particularly in regards to emergency intertie connections and recycled water. 6. Management Efficiencies The agencies demonstrated a number of methods for achieving management efficiencies including performance measurements and the use of strategic plans and objectives accompanied by work plans. 7. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring Rate structures in use include both flat and tiered; several of the cities have increased rates within the past few years or are considering a rate increase. A comparison of rates based on a 5/8” meter and water usage of 20 hundred cubic feet indicate that they are within an acceptable range. The City of Signal Hill has the highest rates in the study area. Sativa-Los Angeles CWD charges a flat rate as they have no metered accounts. Central Basin MWD uses the rate structure established by Metropolitan and includes a surcharge of $37 per acre foot for treated water. Recycled water rates are reviewed annually and are based on an inverted tier structure such that higher volumes are sold at a discounted price. 8. Government Structure Options Some agencies are providing service to connections outside of their boundaries. Out of agency agreements that were in place prior to January 1, 2001 do not require LAFCo approval per Government Code §56133 (e). The Water Replenishment District is evaluating the possibility of annexing area that overlies the Central Groundwater Basin where no active groundwater management is occurring. This may result in more effective management of the groundwater resources; however it would impose a new charge for groundwater use in the area annexed. Due to the size of its service area, condition of the infrastructure, and financial resources, it is recommended that LAFCO consider adopting a zero sphere of influence for the Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District. The District is adjacent to the City of Compton.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 4
9. Local Accountability and Governance The cities are locally accountable and demonstrating good governance practices. All of the cities as well as the two larger special districts have websites used for public notice as well as dissemination of information on water service. Following is a map of the Gateway region and a schematic depicting the water supply for the study area.
LOS ANGELES
CO
LONG BEACH
CO
CARSON
CO
CO
TORRANCE
CO
CO
WHITTIERCO
DOWNEY
COMPTON
CO
NORWALK
CO
EL MONTE
CO
CERRITOS
CO
CO
LAKEWOOD
INDUSTRY
LA MIRADA
INGLEWOOD
ALHAMBRA
PICO RIVERA
CO
MONTEBELLO
VERNON
GARDENA
SOUTH GATE
COMMERCE
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
WEST COVINA
BELL
LYNWOODHAWTHORNE
BELLFLOWER
SANTA FE SPRINGS
ROSEMEAD
BALDWIN PARK
MONTEREY PARK
EL SEGUNDO
CO
CULVER CITY
CO
PARAMOUNT
BEVERLY HILLS
CO
REDONDO BEACH
CO
IRWINDALE
LA HABRA HEIGHTS
LA PUENTE
CO
LOMITA
TEMPLE CITY
MANHATTAN BEACH
PALOS VERDES ESTATES
ARTESIA
CO
SIGNAL HILL
CO
SOUTH EL MONTE
CUDAHY
CO
CO
MAYWOOD
CO
SOUTH PASADENA
CO
CO
CO
SAN GABRIEL
ROLLING HILLS
LAWNDALE
BELL GARDENS
HUNTINGTON PARK
LOS ANGELES
ROLLING HILLS ESTATES
ARCADIA
LONG BEACH
WEST HOLLYWOOD
HERMOSA BEACH
COVINA
CO
CO
CO
COHAWAIIAN GARDENS
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
LONG BEACH
CO
CO
COMONROVIA
CO
CO
CO
CO
WHITTIER
CO
AZUSA
CO
SAN MARINO
COINGLEWOOD
CO
SANTA MONICA
CO
April 16, 2004L A F C OL A F C O
GatewayMSR Area Water
0 2 41 Miles1:250,000
PicoCounty Water District
Central BasinMunicipal Water Distict
La Habra HeightsCounty Water District
Orchard DaleCounty Water District
LegendCities
La Habra Heights County Water DistrictCentral Basin Municipal Water DistrictMSR Areas
Pico County Water DistrictOrchard Dale County Water District
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 6
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 7
NOTE In the following service review report, the abbreviations NP (Not Provided) and NA (Not Applicable) have been used in some charts and figures. During the service review process all agencies were contacted and all agencies were sent a Request for Information (RFI). In instances where complete data was not supplied in response to the RFI, agencies were called. A diligent effort was made to obtain adequate information on each agency, whether directly or through public information sources. The lack of data in these instances does not materially detract from the cumulative conclusions of the report. In instances where NA has been used, the specific information was not applicable to the agency due to size, service area or services provided.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 8
2.0 AGENCY PROFILES The Gateway MSR study area overlies the adjudicated Central Groundwater Basin. Water supply for the area is predominantly groundwater, supplemented with imported and recycled water. The region is mature and generally considered built-out. Infill and redevelopment are occurring in many areas. The 21 public water agencies providing water service in the region are shown below in Table 2.1 – Gateway Water Agencies. Summaries, profiles and service area maps of the individual agencies follow.
Table 2.1 – Gateway Water Agencies Los Angeles LAFCO Water District Service Review Agencies Re
tail D
omes
tic W
ater
Who
lesale
Wat
er
Wat
er T
reat
men
t
Recy
cled
Wat
er
Grou
ndwa
ter M
anag
emen
t
GATEWAY REGION 1. City of Cerritos ● ● ● 2. City of Compton ● 3. City of Downey ● ● 4. City of Huntington Park ● ● ● 5. City of Lakewood ● ● ● 6. City of Long Beach ● ● ● ● 7. City of Lynwood ● ● 8. City of Norwalk ● ● ● 9. City of Paramount ● ● ● 10. City of Pico Rivera – Pico Rivera Water Authority ● ● 11. City of Santa Fe Springs ● ● ● 12. City of Signal Hill ● ● 13. City of South Gate ● ● ● 14. City of Vernon ● ● 15. City of Whittier ● ● ● 16. Central Basin Municipal Water District ● ● ● 17. La Habra Heights County Water District ● ● 18. Orchard Dale Water District ● ● 19. Pico Water District ● ● 20. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District ● ● 21. Water Replenishment District of Southern California ●
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 9
– CITIES – City of Cerritos Cerritos is bounded by the Cities of Santa Fe Springs, La Mirada, Norwalk, Artesia, Lakewood, and Bellflower. The City borders Orange County. Water supply includes groundwater, imported water and recycled water. Cerritos is considered built-out with slow to moderate growth projected. Cerritos wholesales water to the Southern California Water Company, City of Norwalk and the County Water Company. City of Compton The City of Compton is bounded by the Cities of Lynwood, Paramount, Long Beach, and Carson as well as unincorporated area. Compton‘s water supply is comprised of both groundwater and imported water. The City has pumping rights to 5,723 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. In addition, the City is a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The Compton Municipal Water Department provides water service to approximately 80% of the city as well as some unincorporated area; other water purveyors include the Southern California Water Company, Park Water Company, Dominguez Water Corporation, LA County Water, Sativa-Los Angeles CWD, and Midland Park Water Trust. City of Downey The City of Downey is bounded by the Cities of Pico Rivera, Santa Fe Springs, Norwalk, Bellflower, Paramount, South Gate and Bell Gardens. The City provides water service to 96% of the City; the area to the east of I-605 is served by Santa Fe Springs. The City relies on groundwater as its source of potable supply, maintaining connections to the Metropolitan system for emergency use only. Recycled water is provided from the Los Coyotes Water Reclamation Plant in Cerritos. City of Huntington Park The City of Huntington Park is bounded by the Cities of Vernon, Maywood, Cudahy and South Gate as well as unincorporated county area. The City relies on groundwater for its primary source of supply, supplemented by imported water to meet demand. Portions of the City are served by the Southern California Water Company, Maywood Mutual Water Company No. 1, and Maywood Mutual Water Company No. 2. City of Lakewood The City of Lakewood encompasses 9.5 square miles and is bounded by the Cities of Long Beach, Bellflower, Cerritos and Hawaiian Gardens. The City is primarily residential (51%) with a large percentage of public/quasi-public land use (40%). The City’s water supply includes groundwater and recycled water. The City provides water service to the area west of the San Gabriel River. The Southern
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 10
California Water Company serves the area east of the river, and the Peerless Water Company serves approximately 105 customers adjacent to the City of Bellflower. City of Long Beach The City of Long Beach encompasses 52 square miles in the southeastern portion of Los Angeles County. The Long Beach Water Department serves the entire City. The City’s water supply includes groundwater, imported water and recycled water. Long Beach is a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The Long Beach Water Department is actively engaged in conjunctive use projects, including the construction of Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) wells to utilize storage capacity within the Central Basin. City of Lynwood The City of Lynwood is bounded by the Cities of South Gate, Paramount, Compton and Los Angeles along with some unincorporated area. The City relies on groundwater supplemented by imported water. The City provides water service to a majority of the city; the Park Water Company serves the area east of Atlantic Avenue and South of Lavinia Avenue. City of Norwalk The City of Norwalk is bounded by the Cities of Santa Fe Springs, Cerritos, Artesia, Bellflower, and Downey. The City provides water service to approximately 16% of the city; other areas are served by the Park Water Company, Southern California Water Company, the City of Santa Fe Springs and the City of Cerritos. Water supply includes groundwater, imported water and recycled water. City of Paramount The City of Paramount is bounded by the Cities of Downey, Bellflower, Long Beach, Compton, Lynwood and South Gate. The City’s water supply includes groundwater, imported water, and recycled water. Two northern portions of the City above the I-105 are served by the Southern California Water Company and a small southeastern portion is served by Peerless Mutual Water Company. City of Pico Rivera The City of Pico Rivera lies between the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers. In May 1999, the Pico Rivera Water Authority (PRWA) was formed as successor to the City’s Water Department. The City is served by two water purveyors, PRWA (70%) and the Pico Water District (30%). The City is dependent on groundwater as its source of supply. City of Santa Fe Springs The City of Santa Fe Springs is bounded by the Cities of Whittier, Pico Rivera, Downey, Norwalk, Cerritos and La Mirada, as well as unincorporated area. Land use within the City is primarily commercial
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 11
and industrial, with only 10% residential. The City provides water service to approximately 85% of the city with the remainder served by the San Gabriel Valley Water Company, Southern California Water, Park Water, Suburban Water, and Orchard Dale Water District. The City also serves a small portion of the Cities of Downey and Norwalk. The City’s water supply includes groundwater, imported water and recycled water. City of Signal Hill The City of Signal Hill is surrounded by the City of Long Beach. The City relies on groundwater as well as imported water for its supply. The City has completed a feasibility study regarding recycled water. Signal Hill has the second highest growth rate in the region, projected to be 1.5% annually. This is primarily due to redevelopment of former industrial properties. City of South Gate The City of South Gate is bounded by the Cities of Huntington Park, Cudahy, Bell, Bell Gardens, Downey, and Lynwood along with unincorporated county area to the west. The City’s water supply includes groundwater, imported water and recycled water. The Hollydale area is served by the Southern California Water Company. City of Vernon The City of Vernon is predominantly industrial and commercial with less than 100 residents. The City is bounded by the Cities of Los Angeles, Commerce, Bell, Maywood, and Huntington Park. The City relies on groundwater for its primary source of supply supplemented by imported water. The City provides water service to a majority of the area within its boundaries. An area east of the Los Angeles River is served by the California Water Company and a small portion near Maywood is served by Maywood Mutual No. 3. City of Whittier The City of Whittier provides water service to approximately 50% of the City in the northwest portion. The remainder is served by the Suburban Water System Company and the San Gabriel Valley Water Company. The City relies on groundwater and a small increment of recycled water to meet demand. The City holds pumping rights to 895 acre-feet per year in the Central Basin and 8,700 acre-feet per year from the Main San Gabriel Basin. It is generally bounded by unincorporated area, but shares some boundaries on the southwest with Santa Fe Springs, on the west with Pico Rivera, and on the east with La Habra Heights.
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS – Central Basin Municipal Water District The Central Basin MWD wholesales treated imported water to the cities and agencies within the Gateway region. Central Basin MWD, Long Beach and Compton are all members of MWD; therefore the majority
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 12
of the two cities’ incorporated area is excluded from Central Basin’s service area. Central Basin MWD was formed in 1952 under the Municipal Water District Act of 1911 (Water Code §71000 et seq.). The District’s service area is 227 square miles and includes 24 cities, and has an estimated population of 1.5 million. Central Basin MWD is also the primary provider of recycled water which it acquires from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and sells within its service area. In addition to domestic use, the District’s imported and recycled water is also sold to the Water Replenishment District of Southern California for groundwater recharge as well as for use in the seawater intrusion barriers. La Habra Heights County Water District The La Habra Heights County Water District was formed in 1976 under the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.). The District is bounded by the City of Whittier to the west, Orange County to the south, and unincorporated area to the east and north. The District serves the City of La Habra Heights and small pockets of unincorporated area. The area is predominantly rural, low density residential with limited commercial use. It is considered built-out and growth will be minimal. Orchard Dale Water District The Orchard Dale Water District was formed in 1954 under the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.). The District serves approximately 2 square miles of unincorporated area in southeastern Los Angeles County. The District is bordered by the Cities of Whittier, Santa Fe Springs, and La Mirada, as well as unincorporated area. The area is primarily single and multi-family residential. The District has the highest growth rate in the region, projected to be 2.15% annually The District also serves 8 institutional customers. Pico Water District The Pico Water District was formed in 1926 under the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.). The District is located within the City of Pico Rivera. The District’s boundaries encompass approximately 2.82 square miles, or 30% of the City’s incorporated area. The District is dependent on groundwater for its source of supply. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District was formed in 1938 under the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.). The District serves a half-square mile area in the Willowbrook area of unincorporated Los Angeles County and a small portion of the City of Compton. The District is bounded on the west and south by the City of Compton. The District relies on groundwater. Water Replenishment District of Southern California The Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD) was formed in 1959 pursuant to the Water Replenishment District Act (Water Code §60000 et seq.). The District provides groundwater
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 13
replenishment, sea water intrusion protection, and groundwater quality monitoring for the West Coast and Central groundwater basins. The District’s service area covers 420 square miles and includes 43 cities. The District purchases imported and recycled water from the Central Basin MWD and the Long Beach Water Department for replenishment purposes in the Central and West Coast Groundwater Basins.
110
60
405
91
105
6055
COLOS ANGELES
LONG BEACH
CO
CARSON
CO
WHITTIERCO
DOWNEY
CO
COMPTON
NORWALK
CO
WEST COVINA
CERRITOS
INDUSTRY
EL MONTE
CO
CO
LAKEWOOD
LA MIRADA
CO
MONTEBELLO
VERNON
SOUTH GATE
COMMERCE
BELL
LYNWOOD
PICO RIVERA
BELLFLOWER
SANTA FE SPRINGS
ROSEMEAD
MONTEREY PARK
PARAMOUNT
LA HABRA HEIGHTS
LA PUENTE
CO
ARTESIA
SIGNAL HILL
BELL GARDENS
SOUTH EL MONTE
HUNTINGTON PARK
CUDAHY
MAYWOOD
CO
HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CO
CO
CO
GatewayMSR Area
0 2.5 51.25Miles
1:190,000LAFCOLAFCO
Local Agency Formation Commissionfor
Los Angeles County
July 19, 2005
Legend
City Boundaries
MSR areaD:\GIS\mxd\msr\gateway_msr.mxd
November 2005 – Final Report 15
City of Cerritos Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 18125 Bloomfield Ave. – PO Box 3130
Cerritos, CA 90703-3130 Contact: Phone: (562) 860-0311; (562) 916-1371 Email/Website: www.ci.cerritos.ca.us Type: Wholesale/Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
9 sq mi 51,705 54,756 54,936 55,112
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 17.1 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 177 No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 24 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $7,762.7 Expenses: $7,675.9 Reserves 06/30/02: $18,436.7 CIP: $25.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $8.75 Water Chg: $12.80 Monthly Bill: $21.55
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 15,035 30 0 15,065 Agriculture 291 0 0 291 Recycled 236 0 0 236 Other 279 0 0 279 Total 15,841 30 0 15,871 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 3,255 3,407 3,349 3,278 3,077 Groundwater 9,514 10,000 10,500 11,000 11,500 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 12,769 13,407 13,849 14,278 14,577 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 7,055 7,389 7,610 7,839 7,997 Comm/Ind. 2,225 2,380 2,499 2,599 2,674 Landscape/Irr 546 546 550 555 560 Other 473 492 512 532 542 Wholesale Sales 2,469 2,600 2,678 2,753 2,804 Total 12,769 13,407 13,849 14,278 14,577
November 2005 – Final Report 16
City of Compton Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 205 S. Willowbrook Ave.
Compton, CA 90220 Contact: Kambiz Shoghi, General Manager Phone: (310) 605-5524; (310) 763-4567 Fax Email/Website: www.comptoncity.org Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
10 sq mi 93,873 97,378 100,864 104,304
System Information No. of Employees: 31 No. of Connections per Employee 484 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 7.39 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 13.24 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 160 No. of Pump Stations: 5 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 12 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $16,049.6 Expenses: $15,279.6 Reserves 06/30/02: $5,271.3 CIP: $770.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $6.95 Water Chg: $27.60 Monthly Bill: $34.55
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 14,650 0 0 14,650 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 350 0 0 350 Total 15,000 0 0 15,000 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 4,277 4,777 5,200 5,800 6,500 Groundwater 5,723 5,723 5,900 5,900 6,000 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 10,000 10,500 11,100 11,700 12,500 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 8,200 8,200 8,210 8,220 8,220 Comm/Ind. 1,710 1,700 1,700 1,700 1,700 Landscape/Irr 0 0 0 0 0 Other 380 380 380 380 380 Total 10,290 10,280 10,290 10,300 10,300
November 2005 – Final Report 17
City of Downey Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 11111 Brookshire Ave – PO Box 7016
Downey, CA 90241-7016 Contact: Desi Alvarez, Dir of Public Works Phone: (562) 904-7102; (562) 904-7296 Email/Website: www.downeyca.org Type: Retail water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
12.8 sq mi 107,821 114,177 116,582 118,957
System Information No. of Employees: 27 No. of Connections per Employee 849 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 16.3 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 28.52 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 9 – water quality Miles of Pipe: 322 No. of Pump Stations: 20 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 5 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $9,235.8 Expenses: $8,026.2 Reserves 06/30/02: $6,135.0 CIP: $1,954.5
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $4.90 Water Chg: $18.34 Monthly Bill: $23.23
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 22,171 0 0 22,171 Agriculture 5 0 0 5 Recycled 28 0 0 28 Other 711 0 0 711 Total 22,915 0 0 22,915 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 39,815 39,815 39,815 39,815 39,815 Groundwater 19,865 19,865 19,865 19,865 19,865 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 710 735 760 785 810 Total 60,390 60,415 60,440 60,465 60,490 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 16,217 16,725 17,265 17,805 18,346 Comm/Ind. 1,740 1,794 1,852 1,911 1,969 Agricultural 2 2 2 2 2 Other 110 114 117 121 125 Total 18,069 18,635 19,237 19,839 20,442
November 2005 – Final Report 18
City of Huntington Park Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255-4399 Contact: Gregory Korduner, City Manager Phone: (323) 584-6222; (323) 584-6313 fax Email/Website: www.huntingtonpark.org Type: Retail water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
3.0 sq mi 61,597 67,094 69,255 71,383
System Information No. of Employees: 3.8 No. of Connections per Employee 1,711 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 4.75 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 11.83 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 0 Miles of Pipe: 67 No. of Pump Stations: 5 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 13.671 mg Financial Information (FY 2002-2003) (in thousands)
Revenues: $4,872.1 Expenses: $5,705.9 Reserves: $5,657.4 CIP: $1,050.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $5.00 Water Chg: $35.80 Monthly Bill: $45.80
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 6,500 0 0 6,500 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 1 0 0 1 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 6,501 0 0 6,501 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 1,787 2,403 2,473 2,543 2,615 Groundwater 3,632 3,083 3,083 3,083 3,083 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 58 58 58 58 58 Total 5,477 5,544 5,614 5,684 5,756 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 3,285 3,292 3,334 3,375 3,419 Comm/Ind. 2,192 2,194 2,222 2,250 2,279 Landscape/Irr 58 58 58 58 58 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total 5,477 5,544 5,614 5,683 5,756
November 2005 – Final Report 19
City of Lakewood Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 5050 Clark Ave.
Lakewood, CA 90712 Contact: Nancy van der Linden, Sr. Mgmt Analyst Phone: (562) 866-9771; (562) 866-0505 fax Email/Website: www.lakewoodcity.org Type: Retail water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
9.5 sq mi 79,669 83,747 84,419 85,083
System Information No. of Employees: 19 No. of Connections per Employee 1,075 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 7.86 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 13.1 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 428 Miles of Pipe: NP No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 10.9 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $6,443.5 Expenses: $5,861.4 Reserves 066/30/02: $4,243.9 CIP: $1,232.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $6.00 Water Chg: $25.20 Monthly Bill: $31.20
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 20,379 0 0 20,379 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 39 0 0 39 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 20,418 0 0 20,418 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 0 0 0 0 0 Groundwater 9,167 9,282 9,399 9,517 9,636 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 477 501 630 663 696 Total 9,644 9,783 10,029 10,180 10,332 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 8,198 8,302 8,406 8,512 8,618 Comm/Ind. 738 747 757 766 776 Landscape/Irr 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total 8,936 9,049 9,163 9,278 9,394
November 2005 – Final Report 20
City of Long Beach Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 1800 E. Wardlow Road
Long Beach, CA 90807-4994 Contact: Kevin Wattier, General Manager Phone: (562) 570-2300 Email/Website: [email protected] www.lbwater.org Type: Retail water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
52 sq mi 463,406 503,450 518,627 533,590
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NP No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 900 No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 116 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $58,944.7 Expenses: $53,422.1 Reserves: $9,429.0 CIP: $12,158.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $8.31 Water Chg: $32.38 Monthly Bill: $40.69
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic Agriculture Recycled Other Total 89,139 NP NP 89,139 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 45,487 44,839 45,681 48,478 52,534 Groundwater 24,513 25,727 26,770 27,812 27,812 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 5,401 10,648 11,478 12,328 13,025 Total 75,401 81,214 83,928 88,618 93,371 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 63,368 63,342 65,196 68,721 72,452 Comm/Ind. 7,694 12,162 12,192 12,507 12,832 Landscape/Irr 3,890 4,510 5,360 6,210 6,887 Other 1,500 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Total 76,452 81,214 83,928 88,618 93,371
November 2005 – Final Report 21
City of Lynwood Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 11330 Bullis Road
Lynnwood, CA 90262 Contact: Josef Kekula, Civil Engineering Assoc. Phone: (310) 603-0220 ext 287 Email/Website: www.lynwood,ca,us Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
4.8 sq mi 71,765 75,067 76,755 78,424
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee Average Daily Demand (MGD) 6 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 11 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 24 – water quality Miles of Pipe: 93 No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 3 mg Financial Information (FY 2002-2003) (in thousands)
Revenues: $6,245.1 Expenses: $6,047.0 Reserves: $4,427.8 CIP: $6,047.7
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $8.51 Water Chg: $33.80 Monthly Bill: $42.31
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 9,926 0 0 9,926 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 3 0 0 3 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 9,929 0 0 9,929 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 1,255 1,255 1,255 1,255 1,255 Groundwater 5,537 5,537 5,537 5,537 5,537 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 6,792 6,792 6,792 6,792 6,792 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential NP NP NP NP NP Comm/Ind. NP NP NP NP NP Landscape/Irr NP NP NP NP NP Other NP NP NP NP NP Total NP NP NP NP NP
November 2005 – Final Report 22
City of Norwalk Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 12700 Norwalk Blvd. PO Box 1030
Norwalk, CA 90651-1030 Contact: Phone: (562) 929-5700; (562) 929-5773 Email/Website: www.ci.norwalk.ca.us Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
11 sq mi 103,716 111,255 114,009 116,729
System Information No. of Employees: 4.3 No. of Connections per Employee 795 Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NP No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: NP No. of Pump Stations: 3 No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 100,000 gal Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $2,473.8 Expenses: $2,357.2 Reserves: $2,050.2 CIP: $7.8
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $7.65 Water Chg: $39.20 Monthly Bill: $46.85
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 3,418 0 0 3,418 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 3,418 0 0 3,418 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 430 250 250 250 250 Groundwater 790 2,880 2,880 2,880 2,880 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Other Purveyors 735 450 450 450 450 Recycled 128 100 100 100 100 Total 2,083 3,680 3,680 3,680 3,680 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential NP NP NP NP NP Comm/Ind. NP NP NP NP NP Landscape/Irr NP NP NP NP NP Other NP NP NP NP NP Total 1,909 1,941 1,972 2,001 2,030
November 2005 – Final Report 23
City of Paramount Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 16400 Colorado Avenue
Paramount, CA 90723-5012 Contact: Christopher Cash, Asst. Dir. Utilities Phone: (562) 220-2106; (562) 630-6731 fax Email/Website: [email protected]; www.paramountcity.com Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
4.8 sq mi 55,493 57,879 61,477 65,025
System Information No. of Employees: 10.75 No. of Connections per Employee 703 Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NP No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NA Miles of Pipe: NP No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity NP Financial Information (FY 2002-2003) (in thousands)
Revenues: $5,066.0 Expenses: $4,447.3 Reserves 06/30/02: $4,155.9 CIP
Exp: $700.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg 0 Water Chg: $25.63 Monthly Bill: $25.63
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 7,423 82 0 7,505 Agriculture 10 0 0 10 Recycled 37 0 0 37 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 7,470 82 0 7,552 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 2,431 2,492 2,554 2,618 2,683 Groundwater 5,200 5,330 5,463 5,600 5,740 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 392 412 432 454 476 Total 8,023 8,234 8,449 8,672 8,899 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 4,573 4,687 4,804 4,925 5,048 Comm/Ind. 1,900 1,948 1,996 2,046 2,097 Landscape/Irr 478 490 502 515 528 Other 376 385 395 405 415 Total 7,327 7,510 7,698 7,890 8,088
November 2005 – Final Report 24
City of Pico Rivera Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 6615 Passons Blvd. PO Box 1016
Pico Rivera, CA 90660-1016 Contact: Adrian L. Diaz Phone: (562) 801-4462; (562) 801-4421 fax Email/Website: [email protected] www.ci.pico-rivera.ca.us Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
8.4 sq miles 63,686 67,523 69,389 71,231
System Information No. of Employees: 13 No. of Connections per Employee 719 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 6.0 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 8.5 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 22 Miles of Pipe: 90 No. of Pump Stations: 11 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 1 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $8,952.8 Expenses: $7,953.5 Reserves: $5,893.8 CIP: $624.5
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $8.30 Water Chg: $28.60 Monthly Bill: $36.90
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 9,351 0 0 9,351 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 9,351 0 0 9,351 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 0 150 150 150 150 Groundwater 5,843 5,868 5,579 5,579 5,579 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 600 900 1,200 Total 5,843 6,018 6,329 6,629 6,929 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 3,681 3,791 3,905 4,023 4,143 Comm/Ind. 1,987 2,046 2,107 2,171 2,236 Landscape/Irr 175 181 186 192 197 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total 5,843 6,018 6,198 6,385 6,576
November 2005 – Final Report 25
City of Santa Fe Springs Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 11710 E. Telegraph Road
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Contact: Don Jensen, Director of Public Works Phone: (562) 868-0511; (562) 868-7112 Email/Website: [email protected] www.santafesprings.org Type: Retail water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
9 sq mil 17,501 18,263 19,113 19,949
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee Average Daily Demand (MGD) 7.52 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 8.47 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 92 No. of Pump Stations: 2 No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 8 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $8,036.0 Expenses: $6,255.1 Reserves 06/30/02: $2,106.3 CIP: $165.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $7.35 Water Chg: $34.44 Monthly Bill: $41.79
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 4,719 336 0 5,055 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 73 0 0 73 Other (fire) 562 6 0 568 Total 5,354 342 0 5,696 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 3,923 4,191 4,357 4,357 4,500 Groundwater 4,035 4,035 4,035 4,035 4,035 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 770 1,200 1,600 2,000 2,400 Total 8,728 9,426 9,992 10,392 10,935 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 1,225 1,316 1,343 1,370 1,424 Comm/Ind. 6,733 6,910 7,049 7,190 7,478 Landscape/Irr 769 1,200 1,600 1,800 2,000 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total 8,727 9,426 9,992 10,360 10,902
November 2005 – Final Report 26
City of Signal Hill Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 2175 Cherry Avenue
Signal Hill, CA 90755 Contact: Charlie Honeycutt, Dir of Public Works Phone: (562) 989-7300; (562) 989-7393 fax Email/Website: www.ci.signal-hill.ca.us [email protected] Type: Retail water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
9,425 10,558 11,415 12,260
System Information No. of Employees: 12.3 No. of Connections per Employee 221 Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NP No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: NP No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 8 MG Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $3,259.0 Expenses: $3,334.2 Reserves: $21,530.0 CIP: $872,150
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $9.74 Water Chg: $37.95 Monthly Bill: $47.69
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 2,700 15 0 2,715 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 2,700 15 0 2,715 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 165 165 165 165 165 Groundwater 2,022 2,022 2,022 2,022 2,022 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 2,187 2,187 2,187 2,187 2,187 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020* Residential NP NP NP NP 1,404 Comm/Ind. NP NP NP NP 1,911 Landscape/Irr NP NP NP NP 0 Other NP NP NP NP 442 Total 2,130 NP NP NP 3,757 *Ultimate Demand per 1990 Master Plan
November 2005 – Final Report 27
City of South Gate Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 8650 California Ave.
South Gate, CA 90280 Contact: Karen Bell, Interim City Planner Phone: (323) 563-9542; (323) 567-0725 fax Email/Website: [email protected] www.cityofsouthgate.org Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
7.5 sq mi 96,772 108,757 113,085 117,355
System Information No. of Employees: 21.9 No. of Connections per Employee 663 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 11.05 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 13.77 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 135 No. of Pump Stations: 3 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 13.52 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $8,930.6 Expenses: $9,094.5 Reserves: $4,229.1 CIP: $135.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg 0 Water Chg: $32.48 Monthly Bill: $32.48
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 14,520 0 0 14,520 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 6 0 0 6 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 14,526 0 0 14,526 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 0 0 0 0 0 Groundwater 11,797 11,183 11,183 11,183 11,183 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 170 170 170 170 170 Total 11,966 11,353 11,353 11,353 11,353 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential NP NP NP NP NP Comm/Ind. NP NP NP NP NP Landscape/Irr NP NP NP NP NP Other NP NP NP NP NP Total 11,966 11,649* NP NP NP *Per 2000 UWMP
November 2005 – Final Report 28
City of Vernon Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 4305 S. Santa Fe Ave.
Vernon, CA 90058-1714
Contact: Kevin Wilson, PE – Director of Comm Svc and Water
Phone: (323) 583-8811 x258 Email/Website: [email protected]; www.cityofvernon.org Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
XX sq mi 91 95 96 97
System Information No. of Employees: 13 No. of Connections per Employee 135 Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 15.3 No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months < 30 Miles of Pipe: 48.67 No. of Pump Stations: 3 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 16.75 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $8,636.3 Expenses: $7,791.2 Reserves: 0 CIP: $845.1
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $5.63. Water Chg: $20.54 Monthly Bill: $26.17
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 1,750 0 0 1,750 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 1,750 0 0 1,750 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 2,633 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 Groundwater* 9,287 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 11,920 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 *8,039 AF entitlement; additional water rights leased to meet demand Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 9 9 9 9 9 Comm/Ind. 11,180 11,683 11,974 12,274 12,580 Landscape/Irr 0 0 0 0 0 Other 34 34 34 35 35 Total 11,223 11,726 12,017 12,318 12,624
November 2005 – Final Report 29
City of Whittier Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 13230 Penn Street
Whittier, CA 90602 Contact: David Mochizuki, Dir of Public Works Phone: (562) 464-3510 (562) 464-3509 Email/Website: [email protected] www.cityofwhittier.org Type: Wholesale, Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
14.8 sq mi 83,997 88,085 89,577 91,049
System Information No. of Employees: 18 No. of Connections per Employee 494 Average Daily Demand 8 mgd Maximum Day Demand 19 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 152 Miles of Pipe: 100 No. of Pump Stations: 7 No. of Pressure Zones: 4 Storage Capacity 33.38 mg Financial Information (FY 2002-2003) (in thousands)
Revenues: $7,700.0 Expenses: $7,500.0 Reserves 06/30/02: $12,209.3 CIP: $670.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $2.00 Water Chg: $33.00 Monthly Bill: $35.00
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 11,300 0 0 11,300 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 7 0 0 7 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 11,307 0 0 11,307 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 0 0 0 0 0 Groundwater 9,595 9,595 9,595 9,595 9,595 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 50 50 50 50 50 Total 9,645 9,645 9,645 9,645 9,645 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential NP NP NP NP Comm/Ind. NP NP NP NP Landscape/Irr NP NP NP NP Other NP NP NP NP Total 9,645 NP NP NP NP
November 2005 – Final Report 30
Central Basin MWD Agency Information Service Area Information
Address: 17140 South Avalon Boulevard Carson, California 90746
Contact: Art Aguilar, General Manager Phone: (310) 660-6205; (310) 516-1327 fax Email/Website: [email protected] www.westbasin.com Type: Wholesale Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
227 sq mi 1.5 million 1,601,500 1,656,300 1,721,200
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee NA Average Daily Demand (MGD) NA Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NA No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 0 Miles of Pipe: 40 (recycled water) No. of Pump Stations: 2 (recycled water) No. of Pressure Zones: NA Storage Capacity 0 Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $39,078.6 Expenses: $39,078.6 Designated Funds: $21,964.8 CIP: $2,975.0
Wholesale Water Rates per acre-foot (eff. January 1, 2004) Non-interruptible & Barrier Tier 1: $467 Tier 2: $548 Seasonal Long-term Storage: $337 Recycled Range: <25 AF - $290; 100+ AF - $230 in CBMWD Service Area Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 53 0 0 53 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 182 1 0 183 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 235 1 0 236 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 96,959 96,959 96,959 96,959 96,959 Groundwater 0 0 0 0 0 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 3,862 3,862 3,862 3,862 3,862 Total 100,821 100,821 100,821 100,821 100,821 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential Comm/Ind. Landscape/Irr Other Total 100,821 100,821 100,821 100,821 100,821
10
105
91
710
110
110
103
47
605
60
5
1
CO
LOS ANGELES
LONG BEACH
CO
CARSON
CO
CO
CO
WHITTIERCO
DOWNEY
COMPTON
NORWALK
CO
CO
EL MONTE
CERRITOS
CO
LAKEWOOD
INDUSTRY
LA MIRADA
ALHAMBRA
PICO RIVERA
CO
MONTEBELLO
VERNON
WEST COVINA
SOUTH GATE
BELL
COMMERCE
LYNWOOD
BELLFLOWER
SANTA FE SPRINGS
ROSEMEAD
BALDWIN PARK
MONTEREY PARK
CO
IRWINDALE
PARAMOUNT
LA HABRA HEIGHTS
LA PUENTE
SAN GABRIEL
CO
LONG BEACH
TEMPLE CITY
CO
ARTESIA
CO
SIGNAL HILL
ARCADIA
BELL GARDENS
SOUTH EL MONTE
HUNTINGTON PARK
CO
CUDAHY
SOUTH PASADENA
MAYWOOD
CO
COVINA
COCO
CO
CO
CO
COHAWAIIAN GARDENS
CO
CO
CO
CO
SAN MARINO
CO
LONG BEACH
CO
MONROVIAAZUSA
CO
CO
CO
CO
WHITTIER
CO
CO
CO
CO
S M
AI N
ST
S F
IGU
ER
OA
ST
AV
ALO
N B
LVD
FLORENCE AV
ALONDRA BLVD
CH
ER
RY
AV
IMPERIAL HWY
TELEGRAPH RD
COLIMA RD
FIRESTONE BLVD
E 7TH ST
GAGE AV
PIO
NE
ER
BLV
D
ARTESIA BLVD
WHITTIER BLVD
E WILLOW ST
E CARSON ST
E IMPERIAL HWY
E OLYMPIC BLVD
CA
RM
EN
ITA
RD
DEL AMO BLVD
E SPRING ST
ATLA
NTI
C A
V
NO
RW
ALK
BLV
D
AMAR RD
LAKE
WO
OD
BLVD
RO
SEM
EAD
BLV
D
E 4TH ST
S B
RO
AD
WA
Y
SA
NTA
AN
I TA
AV
SLAUSON AV
STU
DE
BA
KE
R R
D
GAR
FIE
LD A
V
S SO
TO S
T
BE
LLFL
OW
ER
BLV
D
RAMONA BLVD
SOUTH ST
S S
AN
PE
DR
O S
T
CO
MP
TO
N A
V
N L
AK
EW
OO
D B
L VD
S ATLANTIC BLVD
TYLE
R A
V
E 223RD ST
WORKMAN MILL R
D
N S
TUD
EB
AK
ER
RD
LEFFINGWELL RD
N B
ELL
FLO
WE
R B
L VD
S G
RAND
AV E 3RD ST
E 1ST ST
N BROADWAY
VA
LLE
Y V
IEW
AV
BEVERLY BLVD
BAL
DW
IN A
V
ROSECRANS AV
LA M
IRA
DA
BLV
D
MILLS AV
E FLORENCE AV
S SA
NTA
FE
AV
N LO
NG
BEACH
BLVD
W TEMPLE ST
WASHINGTON BLVD
WIL
MIN
GTO
N A
V
VALLEY BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
W SUNSET BLVD
W 3RD ST
E WASHINGTON BLVD
S H
ACIE
ND
A BL
VD
E DEL AMO BLVD
LON
G BE
ACH
BLVD
HUNTINGTON DR N
PA
CIF
IC B
LVD
PECK RD
BANDINI BLVD
TWEEDY BLVD
MULBERRY DR
S W
IL MIN
GT
ON
AV
E 2ND ST
E VERNON AV
N FIG
UEROA S
T
LAS TUNAS DR
BLO
OM
FIE
LD A
V
ALAM
EDA
ST
S A
LAM
ED
A S
T
GARVEY AV
E OCEAN BLVD
SA
N G
AB
RIE
L B
LVD
E ANAHEIM ST
S F
RE
MO
NT
AV
ARROW HWY
CA
LIFO
RN
IA A
V
E SEPULVEDA BLVD
W MAIN ST
PUENTE A
VS S
UNSET AV
W BEVERLY BLVD
DURFEE AV
PASS
ONS
BLV
D
W PICO BLVD
EA
STE
RN
AV
WILSHIRE BLVD
S E
AS
TER
N A
V
W OCEAN BLVD
BA
LDW
IN P
AR
K B
LVD
S C
EN
TR
AL A
V
S G
AR
FIE
LD A
V
E 103RD ST
E VICTORIA ST
DA
LY S
T
E GAGE AV
W VALLEY BLVD
DE
L M
AR
AV
E CESAR E CHAVEZ AV
SILVER L
AKE BLV
D
ABBOTT RD
W WILLOW ST
N R
ED
ON
DO
AV
W 1ST ST
MISSION RD
N E
ASTE
RN
AV
HARBOR BLVD
IRW
IND
ALE
AV
N LOS
COYOTE
S DIA
G
E ATHERTON ST
N PUENTE A
V
W ROSECRANS AV
N A
LAM
ED
A S
T
GLE
ND
ALE
BLV
D
ALAM
ITO
S AV
S H
OO
VE
R S
T
W ANAHEIM ST
W COMPTON BLVD
PASA
DEN
A A
V
E GARVEY AV
N A
VA
LON
BL V
D
WILM
ING
TON
BLV
D
GR
EE
NLE
AF
AV
E COMPTON BLVD
S S
AN
GA
BR
IEL
BLV
D
CESAR E CHAVEZ AV
POTRERO GRANDE DR
SANTA F
E SPRIN
GS RD
PAINTER A
V
S AL
VARA
DO S
T
N SAN FERNANDO RD
AZU
SA A
V
FIGU
ER
OA
ST
N P
AR
AM
OU
NT
BLV
D
N C
EN
TR
AL
AV
E PACIFIC COAST HWY
E VALLEY BLVD
E MAIN ST
S A
ZUS
A A
V
E WARDLOW RD
E CAMERON AV
MO
NTER
EY R
D
PA
RA
MO
UN
T B
LVD
E LAS TUNAS DR
SA
NTA
FE
AV
ALHAMBRA A
V
N R
OS
EM
EA
D B
LVD
N S
UN
SE
T A
V
N SPRING ST
W GARVEY AV
S LO
RENA
ST
E PUENTE AV
TURN
BULL
CAN
YON
RD
E 6TH ST
W BADILLO ST
E FIRESTONE BLVD
W 7TH ST
E MISSION DR
W 223RD ST
W PACIFIC COAST HWY
BADILLO ST
W VERNON AV
E LOMITA BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
W WARDLOW RD
WESTMINSTER AV
N MAIN ST
MARENGO ST
SO
TO S
T
RUSH ST
FULL
ERTO
N RD
W JEFFERSON BLVD
ROOT ST
E ARTESIA BLVD
N MISSION RD
E LOS COYOTES DIA
G
E BEVERLY BLVD
W SAN BERNARDINO RD
E ALONDRA BLVD
W LAS TUNAS DR
W ALONDRA BLVD
E 37TH ST
N HACIE
NDA BLV
D
E EL SEGUNDO BLVD
S BEA
CH BLV
D
E ROSECRANS AV
E 9TH ST
E AMAR RD
E CENTURY BLVD
S D
EL
MA
R A
V
N H
ARB
OR
BLV
D
E 4TH PL
W VICTORIA ST
S G
REE
NWO
OD
AV
PARA
MO
UNT
BLVD
GA
RFI
ELD
AV
E 7TH ST
PAR
AM
OU
NT
BLVD
S A
LAM
ED
A S
T
S E
AS
TER
N A
V
S A
ZU
SA
AV
S G
AR
FIE
LD A
V
N M
ISSI
ON R
D
VALLEY BLVD
E CARSON ST
WHITTIER BLVD
VALLEY BLVD
ARTESIA BLVD
N SUNSET A
V
W OLYMPIC BLVD
S G
AR
FIE
LD A
V
S SA
N PE
DRO
ST
SOUTH ST
GARVEY AV
E SLAUSON AV
E VALLEY BLVD
E ALONDRA BLVD
E PACIFIC COAST HW
Y
VALLEY BLVD
E GARVEY AV
S S
AN
TA
FE
AV
E PACIFIC COAST HWY
NO
RW
ALK
BLV
D
PEC
K R
D
SA
NTA
FE
AV
WIL
MIN
GTO
N A
V
S C
EN
TR
AL
AV
BEVERLY BLVD
DURFEE AV
S C
EN
TR
AL
AV
ATL
AN
TIC
AV
E ANAHEIM ST
E DEL AMO BLVD
FIGU
ER
OA
ST
Central BasinMunicipal Water District
1:140,000
LAFCOLAFCO September 9, 2003
LegendRoads, Thomas Bros.Central Basin MWD(SOI same as district boundary)
0 2 41Miles
November 2005 – Final Report 32
La Habra Heights County Water District Agency Information Service Area Information
Address: 1271 North Hacienda Road La Habra Heights, CA 90631
Contact: Michael Gualtieri, General Mgr Phone: (562) 697-6769; (562) 697-5568 Email/Website: [email protected] Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
6 sq mi 6,450 6,543 6,589 6,635
System Information No. of Employees: 8 No. of Connections per Employee 244 Average Daily Demand 1,350 gpm Maximum Day Demand 3,105 gpm No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 60 No. of Pump Stations: 4 No. of Pressure Zones: 2 Storage Capacity 12.51 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $2,564.1 Expenses: $3,028.5 Reserves 06/30/02: $2,226.8 CIP: 0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $25.96 Water Chg: $26.00 Monthly Bill: $51.96
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 1,959 0 0 1,959 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 1,959 0 0 1,959 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 418 418 418 418 418 Groundwater 2,477 2,477 2,477 2,477 2,477 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 2,895 2,895 2,895 2,895 2,895 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential NP NP NP NP NP Comm/Ind. NP NP NP NP NP Landscape/Irr NP NP NP NP NP Other NP NP NP NP NP Total 2,848 2,848 2,848 2,848 2,848
CO
LA HABRA HEIGHTSWHITTIER
COCO
SKYLINE DR
WEST RD
EAST RD
*****
COLIMA RD
JANINE DR
DOROTHEA RD
HACI
ENDA
BLV
D
HARBOR BLVD
BIXBY
FULLERTON RD
SUBTR
OPIC
DR
LE F
LOR
E D
R
LINDANTE
DR
REPOSADO DR
S HACIENDA BLVD
SALEROSO DR
CYPRESS ST
SOLE
JAR
DR
KASHLAN RD
ARDSHEAL DR
MAR VISTA ST
NABAL RD
CHELLA DR
WALNUT ST
LA HABRA RD
SERANATA DR
ELZA DR
VALL
E DR
GO
TERA DR
LAS PALOMAS DR
GLENCOVE DR
SKYLINE FIRE RD
ENCANADA DR
JON
ES RD
AURORA CREST DR
VEN
ADO
DR
TUMIN RD
POPENOE RD
CHOTA RD
EL T
ERRA
ZA D
R
ARBELA DR
CORRAL MTWY
EL T
RA
VES
IA D
R
RIO
LEM
PA D
R
CM DL SUR
PAP
AYA D
R
KANOLA RD
POW
DER
CAN
YON
MTW
Y
PASADA DR
HOLMES CIR
OAKRANCH RD
YOUNGWOOD DR
POZO
DR
GA
RO
NA
DR
VIRAZON DR
CIT
RU
S S
T
RADIO RD
DRAPER DR
LEUCADIA RD
PICAACHO DR
PEPPERTREE DR
SHARPLESS DR
LA ALBA DR
AHU
ACAT
E R
DGREE
N VI
EW R
D
NEARBANK DR
DO
LON
ITA AV
ESEVERRI LNBOGARDUS AV
CASALERO DR
LA LINDURA DR
CONTADOR DR
MADELENA DR
LAR
RY
LYN
DR
EL P
ASE
O
GLEN
MAR
K DR
HIATT ST
LAMAT R
D
LEANDER DR
COBA
N R
D
ME
LGA
R D
R
AMATE DR
SUNRIS
E DR
POR
TAFI
NO
PL
GALLINETA ST
SAUSALITO DR
METROPOL DR
VISTA RD
CO
RE
LLA
AV
BUD
LEIG
H D
R
EL PASEO DR
LAS CUMBRES DR
CITRON RD
CARGREEN AV
BEN
IK R
D
EL CAJONITA DR
FALL
EN
DR
WINDRUSH DR
AGAV
E A
V
RICH
VIEW
DR
BAINTREE AV
REM
OR
A D
R
VIA LADER
A
MATADOR DR
ALTURA LN
GROVEDALE DR
HID
DEN
CAN
YO
N R
D
LOMACITAS LN
GANTE
R RD
BON
NIEJEAN
RD
MA
RB
LE R
D
LONECREST DR
CLOISTER DR
CULLMAN AV
AIROSO RD
CANONITA DR
PRUDENCIA DR
HIGH TOR DR
CARMENIA DR
GUN TREE DR
AVALO
DR
DRURY DR
CANDELA DR
CHORAL DR
RANCH HILL DR
CRIMSON CREST DR
CONTRA COSTA DR
S VIEWFIELD AV
SIER
RA
VIS
TA D
R
VILLA RITA DR
SAPO
TA D
R
NO
VEL
CT
THAX
TON
AV
SKAGWAY ST
MO
LLYK
NOLL
AV
MIKINDA CT
LUPIN HILL RD
CASINO DR
ANG
OLA
AV
CASTLEFORD P
L
CERQUITA DR
VIS DEL LLANO DR
HER
MITAG
E DR
LA R
IATA
DR
LOTUS DR
FLO
WE
RFI
ELD
LN
RO
SIN
AV
DAR
LEN
E D
R
HONNINGTON ST
VERNA DR
NU
EVA VIS
TA DR
MO
ND
O D
R
CANARIAS DR
HILLSIDE CT
MEA
DOW
LAND
DR
PAD
ON
IA A
V
MILMAC DR
DEEP C
ANYO
N R
D
CAPA DR
DAHL DR
CAN
CH
O D
R
CORDERO
RD
AMELG
A DR
MAYSTO
NE PL
CONCHITO DR
BONITA DR
CAP C
T
CAND
IA DR
SHAWNAN LN
JANISON DR
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
LAS PALOM
AS DR
****
*
VIRAZON DR
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
LAS PALOM
AS DR
*****
*****
*****
*****
SKYLINE DR
****
*
*****
HAC
IEN
DA
BLV
D
****
*
*****
COBAN RD
*****
SKYLINE DR
*****
*****
*****
*****
ARBELA DR
SKYLINE FIRE RD
*****
JANINE DR
*****
La Habra Heights County Water District1:19,000 LAFCOLAFCO
June 18, 2003
LegendRoads, Thomas Bros.La Habra Heights CWD(SOI same as district boundary)
0 0.5 10.25Miles
Orange County
November 2005 – Final Report 34
Orchard Dale Water District Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 13819 E. Telegraph Road
Whittier, CA 90604 Contact: Gary Draper, General Manager Phone: (562) 941-0114; (562) 944-6384 fax Email/Website: [email protected] Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
2.02 sq mi 20,013 22,281 24,805 27,616
System Information No. of Employees: 7 No. of Connections per Employee 595 Average Daily Demand (MGD) 2.06 mgd Maximum Day Demand (MGD) 2.74 mgd No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months 79 – calls for service in 2002 Miles of Pipe: 39 No. of Pump Stations: 2 No. of Pressure Zones: 1 Storage Capacity 4.5 mg Financial Information (FY 2003-2004) (in thousands)
Revenues: $2,353.9 Expenses: $1,871.6 Reserves: $2,250.0 CIP Exp: $139.4
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg $10.00 Water Chg: $31.00 Monthly Bill: $41.00
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 4,162 0 0 4,162 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 4,162 0 0 4,162 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 1,390 1,443 1,276 1,347 1,418 Groundwater 1,107 1,107 1,107 1,107 1,107 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 242 246 250 Total 2,497 2,550 2,625 2,700 2,775 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 2,273 2,255 2,327 2,399 2,471 Comm/Ind. 152 152 152 152 152 Landscape/Irr 54 54 54 54 54 Other 18 89 92 95 98 Total 2,497 2,550 2,625 2,700 2,775
CO
LA MIRADA
WHITTIER
SANTA FE SPRINGS
IMPERIAL HWY
UP RR
TELEGRAPH RD
COLI
MA
RD
LEFFINGWELL RD
SCO
TT A
V
MILLS AV
MEYER RD
CAR
ME
NIT
A R
D
MULBERRY DR
LELA
ND
AV
LAMBERT RD
SHO
EMA
KER
AV
LA M
IRA
DA
BLV
D
INEZ
AV
GUNN AV
FIDE
L AV
V ALL
EY V
I EW
AV
CO
L E R
D
LAKELAND RD
*****
BROADWAY
HAWES ST
FLORENCE AV
PAIN
TER
AV
CULLEN ST
BEATY AV
ARR
OYO
DR
STAMY R
D
REIS ST
VICTO
RIA A
V
S LO
UIS
AV
GR
EEN
STO
NE
AV
BNSF RR
LANETT AV
MIDCREST DR
MIN
A A
V
LOM
A D
R BUR
GE
SS A
V
UTICA ST
LAUR
EL AV
KANE A
V
SPRINGVIEW DR
TELE
CH
RO
N A
VGOODHUE ST
MILLER RD
E TEDFORD DR
GRANADA AV
RUOFF AV
ALC
LAD
AV
SUNDANCE AV
LEMON DR
LUKAY ST
SARANAC DR
STARBUCK ST
NEW
GA
TE A
V
LORETTA DR
KEESE DR
DUNTON DR
LAS FLORES AV
SING
LETO
N DR
JENKINS DR
ARM
SD
ALE
AV
LOS
CO
YOTE
S AV
CLOSE ST
MIT
ON
Y A
V
MES
SINA
DR
FLOMAR DR
MINES AV
HORNELL ST
PARK ST
GLA
DH
ILL
RD
COTEAU DR
OX
FOR
D D
R
LOS NIETOS RD
PLACID DR
CREWE ST
THEIS
AV
RAM
SEY
DR
FRE
EMA
N A
V
VIRGINIA AV
OVAL DR
OCASO
AV
ARC
HW
AY
DR
CANE
LO R
D
RUFUS AV
ARMLEY AV
ANOLA ST
SURREY LN
CO
UR
SER
AV
RAINIER AV
ME
MP
HIS A
V
RICHVALE DR
NAS
HV
ILLE AV
MA
RQ
UAR
DT A
V
GREEN
LEAF AV
HAS
TING
S D
R
EAGA
N DR
HOLL
YVIE
W D
R
LINDHALL WY
LA C
I MA
DR
E C
HER
E D
R
AHMANN AV
TRUMBALL ST
SYRACUSE ST
CEDARSPRINGS DR
PARI
SE D
R
CALMADA AV
BON
A V
IST A
LN
WEEKS DR
LIGHT ST
EDD
ER
TON
AV
THR
AC
E DR
DANBROOK DRMYSTIC ST
ALLEGAN ST
CORL
EY D
R
MIN
A S
T
HE S
T ER
AV
HONEYSUCKLE LN
S P
AR
ISE
DR
DITTMAR DR
CARNELL ST
GLENN DR
STARLIGHT AV
E BUSBY DR
KAYR
EID
DR
HAR
TDAL
E A
V
DALM
ATIA
N A
V
CHADSEY D
R
FERNVIEW ST
ELMORE
AV
GAYVIE
W D
R
TRO
PIC
O A
V
LANNING DR
MO
LIN
E D
R
GRAYVILLE DR
FAIRACRES DR
BENTONGROVE DR
BLUE
FIELD
AV
KESS
OCK AV
CORNISHCREST RD
LA S
ER
NA
DR
E HALEY AV
SUNNYBROOK LN
BONA
VIST
A LN
HERMES ST
LA FORGE ST
E KEESE DR
WH
ITTW
OO
D D
R
WO
OD
STE
AD
AV
SUNSHINE AV
RU
TLA
ND
AV
SPLENDORA DR
RARITAN DR
FENDALE AV
SANDOVAL ST
DEVILLO DR
SUNNYMEAD DR
VIBURNUM DR
CERECITA DR
LA V
INA
LN
ADGER DR
WOODCREST DR
GOLDEN LANTERN LN
OVEREST AV
HOMAGE AV
ADEL
WY
HUTCHINS DR
HAYWARD ST
BRIS
TOL D
R
RIM
RO
CK
DR
LUCINDA DR
CERE
S AV
BELCOURT DR
WILMAGLEN DR
REGAT
TA A
V
TERRYKNOLL DR
FIELDING DR
STEPROCK DR
LAKE VIEW DR
POULTER DR
LASHBURN ST
MO
HA
LL L
N
GLENGYLE ST
RIMGATE DR
NATALIE DR
MAYES DR
DICKY STPARKINSON AVBEN HUR AV
STARPATH DR
LA S
ER
ENA
DR
TOER
GE D
R
LA SABANA AV
ABISKO D
RO
BER
T AV
S BIE
LLA W
Y
GR
EEN
B US
H A
V
S WOODRIDGE AV
PAS
VILL
A CA
PRI
BROAD
FIELD DR
META DR
MO
NTIC
ELLO D
R
HEFLIN DR
NANRY ST
TERRACEDALE DR
HENSHAW AV
MCGEE DR
GE
RBE
R A
V
CH
A LC
O S
T
TOLMAN DR
GO
TTES LN
GU
ILFO
RD
AV
SALI
DA A
V
S TELE
CH
RO
N AV
E SUNNYSIDE PL
LOC
KPO
RT
PL
WEDGEPORT
AV
DU
FFIELD
AV
LISBUR
N PL
LADANA CT
PATT
ERS
ON
PL
CLOSE ST
LA C
IMA
DR
LA C
IMA
DR
E TE
DFORD D
R
BELCOURT DR
RAM
SEY
DR
WOODCREST DR
LINDHALL WY
REIS ST
LIGHT ST
VALL
EY V
IEW
AV
*****
CHADSEY D
R
*****
STEPROCK DR
PARISE DR
CO
RLE
Y D
R
T RO
PI C
O A
V
MINA AV
THEIS
AV
*****
NEW
GA
TE A
V
REIS ST
LUKAY ST
***** STARBUCK ST
REIS ST
LAU
RE
L A
V *****
HORNELL ST
KANE A
V
TRUMBALL ST
NEW
GA
TE A
V
MYSTIC ST
RICHVALE DR
INEZ
AV
HORNELL ST
CORLEY D
R
MCGEE DR
ANOLA ST
*****
L A S
ER
NA
DR
LORETTA DR
*****
MYSTIC ST
FLOMAR DR
*****
MYSTIC ST
ANOLA ST
BONAVISTA
LN
RAM
SE
Y DR
L A C
IMA
DR
*****
HOM
AGE
AV
*****
CLOSE ST
BENTONGROVE DR
TRUMBALL ST
CORNISHCREST RD
DUNTON DR
E BUSBY DR
MIDCREST DR
*****
CLOSE ST
LEFFINGWELL RDVIRGINIA AV
GRAYVILLE DR
REIS ST
PLACID DR
PARISE D
R
LA C
IMA
DR
COLI
MA
RD
LA S
ER
NA
DR
STAM
Y R
D
PARISE
DR
REGATTA
AV
MYSTIC ST
GOODHUE ST
*****
E BUSBY DR
RUFUS AVTRUMBALL ST
WEEKS DR
MYSTIC ST
PLACID DR
*****
****
*
GOODHUE ST
PLACID DR
RIMGATE DR
SARANAC DR
PAIN
TER
AV
*****
ALLEGAN ST
RUOFF A
V
ALLEGAN ST
MYSTIC ST
ALC
LAD
AV
MIDCREST DR
PARI
SE D
R
CERECITA DR
STAM
Y R
D
FERNVIEW ST
ANOLA ST
MEM
PHIS
AV
CERECITA DR
FAIRACRES DR
NASHVILLE AV
ANOLA ST
ANOLA ST
TRUMBALL ST
*****
PLACID DR
VICTO
RIA A
V
FAIRACRES DR
ALLEGAN ST
CERES AV
LAUREL A
V
SARANAC DR
*****
CORLEY D
R
TERRYKNOLL DR
SUNSHINE AV
LA SERN
A DR
CORNISHCREST RD
LIGHT ST
WEEKS DR
EAG
AN
DR
MINA AV
ALC
LAD
AV
REGATTA AV
ANOLA ST
REIS ST
LEFFINGWELL RD
HESTER AV
ANOLA ST
VALL
EY V
IEW
AV
*****
CAR
ME
NIT
A R
D
Orchard Dale County Water District1:15,000 LAFCOLAFCO
September 15, 2003
LegendRoads, Thomas Bros.
Orchard Dale CWD(SOI same as district boundary)
0 0.3 0.60.15Miles
November 2005 – Final Report 36
Pico Water District Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 4843 S. Church Street – PO Box 758
Pico Rivera, CA 90660 Contact: Daniel Sprenger, General Manager Phone: (562) 692-3756; (562) 695-5627 fax Email/Website: [email protected] Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
3.7 sq miles 27,000 30,260 30,317 30,390
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NP No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: 40 No. of Pump Stations: 7 No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 1.25 mg Financial Information (CY 2003) (in thousands)
Revenues: $2,747.0 Expenses: $2,417.0 Reserves (2002): $3,678.2 CIP: $100.0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf) Meter Chg/Surchgs $17.84 Water Chg: $26.76 Monthly Bill: $44.60
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 5,168 0 0 5,168 Agriculture 60 0 0 60 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 85 0 0 85 Total 5,313 0 0 5,313 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 0 0 0 0 0 Groundwater* 3,732 3,624 3,624 3,624 3,624 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 3,732 3,624 3,624 3,624 3,624 Source: Central Basin; PWD adjudicated water right = 3,624 af/yr Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential Comm/Ind. Landscape/Irr Other Total 3,732 3,885 3,890 3,896 3,903
FIELD
VILLE
P WO
OD
FORD
9300LGER
700ORA RD
AGUSTA
39
DR
ISORA HILTON
PO
INTE
ST
40
AV
ST
BEVERLY200
ST
3900
AVRE
A
SAIN
AV
VAN AKEN WY
400
FORB
E
AV
AV
BANTA TRAI
LSREA
CA
LIC
O
ST
ST CYPR
ESS
AV FAIRW AY
BLVD BLZOLA
CO
LUM
BIA
MA
RIS
AV
AV
IBSEN AV
300RD
PL
4000
POSAS AVAVLAS
SPAN
ISH
AV
7TH
3800
400
300
6TH
E8300 ST
AMISTAD
BR
AD
LEY
BEVERLYHARRELL
5TH
TILMONT
AV
BEVERLY
AV WIL
BE
R
ARDELL
CULPMAIDEN
4TH
ALEMAN AVTER DR
CH
APE
LLE
AV
3RD
AV
ST
POPL
AR
N
STLN 8300 AVCOLMERE
300
1ST
AV
N
RD ST
STFIR
ARMA AV
N
AVST
200
ST
N E
WAR
RIN
GTO
N
AVSTOAKN PLWIL
BER
LIN
DEL
L
BEVERLY MIG
UEL200
N
ACAC
IA
DORK
AV
RIVE
R
MADISON
NTE
BELL
O
FREMONT ARMA
EMMETT PARK
200
AV
DU
RFE
E
PKW
Y
FREMONTAV
WILLIAMS
ASTTILMONT ST
SQ
BEVERLY
PLW
SQ8900
WYHART
AV
AV
AMIS
TAD
PLE CLEVELAND
NEWMARK
LIN
DS
EY
AVST200
CA
LIC
O
MELITA
4300AV
MALL
8500
TOROS
N
TAGUSGI
CA
LAD
A
STGAN
GE
L
EDNAAV ARMA G
ABRI
EL
4600
POPLAR WY
100
STBLVD LOS
AV
SPRA
100
SA
ND
OV
AL
ST
ST
STBRID
GEVIEW
ST
4400
ST
ST
AVMARIS
ST
DRSTST100
ST
ELBA
EST
SAN
ABBE
YWO
OD
ELBA RD
ST
4700ST
4700
ST
AV
100
STSTWHITTIER
100
DEL
AND
5TH
ELNORA
LAY
MAN
ELNORAST
4400AVC
ALA
DA
9600
3RD
2ND
AMBE
RW
OO
D AV
CREELANDST
BLVDAV
GA
RR
ICK
RO
SEM
EAD
6TH
200
RD
IVY
BLVD
AC
AC
IA S
T
AVST BARTOLOPOWERSAV
S
OLYMPIC
S
OA
K
4400M
YR
TLE
PIN
E
METROBLFIR
RAILTON
BLVD
4600
AVST CREELAND
S
WYO
RA
NG
E
8200
200
GR
APE
MA
NN
ING
BEVERLY
200
RD
S 4T
H
ST 9200STOLYMPICOLYMPIC LNOLYMPIC
RD
WYSPRUCES
RR9500RAILTON
84008500
LTBLVDST
GIV EN WAL
NU
T
ST RD RIVERVIEW
DRUNION
AV WHITTIER
WALNUTMOUNTAIN TO
BIA
S
AVCAN
AL
WEST UPST CIT
RU
S
PL RD
4TH
BL AV BLVD
VIEW AV HIGHTREE
S
HANAN 1 BOLKER WY
SH
LOHART SAN
DU
RFE
E
LEX
ING
TONO
AV
SAN STCO
LUM
BIA
WY
FRW
Y
8600 4900
2 CINDY LNPICO
AV STACA
CIA
SPEEDWAY
NO
RM
AN
9500GABRIEL
3 BRIGHTONWOOD AV
AV
BRIAN
STEPHENSCT
ST
AVWEST
RD
ST
BRASHER
4 VICTORIA LN FISHMAN
5000
AV BLVD
5 JILLIENE LN
400
VAN
LYLE
3RD
LOCH GABR
IEL
STLAYM
AN
ST
RD HOLBROOK
BLVD
EDUARDO
S
TILE AV
PL
IND
US
T RY
STST WEST ST
AV
8300
ORANGE
OB
RE
GO
N
9000LOMOND RI
VER
UNDER- RDDE
LAN
D
SPEEDWAY
AV
LIN
DSE
Y
BLVD AV
WOOD
GST
STAV DRDR SHENANDOAH
BLVD ST
600
PASS
ON
S
WAV
ERLY
DR
PIO
NE
ER
5500
DUL
IN
VERNER
ROSEHEDGE
600
AVST TOB
IAS
REICHLING
TOW
NLEY
4900AV
JACKS
ON
MESAGROVE
CALI CO
RIC
HMO
ND
AV AV MARBRING
AV
9400 FLORAL
CTSTLN AV
BENGR
EGG
AV
DR
LORE
BLUFF
NOBLES
AV
AVDR ST
DANBYAVCATHERINEAV BE
N
BEXLEY
LIN
DSEY
AVTOROS
ALDER53
00
AV
MONTANA
ALMO JUA
RE
Z
DU
NLAP
CO
RD
MILNAST
LOS
CHUR
CH
DRAV UNDERWOOD
SEE CALVA BERNARDINO
MIL
LUX
STLOCH GLENCANNON
DRDR
AV
CIR ESPE
RAN
ZA
ZOLA
AVHAVENWOOD
AV
BRADHURST
10000ST
AVDRAV
HOLBROOKORANGE
CRO
SSING
LOCHBRID
GEVIEW
ALDRICH DRMARIS
AVON
CALICO
AVST MANZANAR
ST
ADELE
AV
ST ALDER A
V
BENDR EL
AV
5800
REY
AV LOMOND
AND
BLVD
AV
8700DR
RD
ROGER ORCHARD
RDHAVENWOOD
COFFMAN
LOCKHEED
DRMARIS
CT DOW
LING
AV
AV
PICO
5600
CITR
ON
ELL
BEXLEYREICHLING
CO
OLH
UR
ST
AV
BLVD
KILG
ARRY
STMARIS AV
AV
MA RIS 8900 LEM
ORA
N
LOCH
TOWNLEY
ROSEHEDGE
AVON AVDRMANZANAR
LOCH
AV
AV
RD
AV
CO
FFMA
N
REDBIRD
DORLAND
LOMOND
DRGLEND
OLA
DR
DR6400
BRADHURST
DR
PLEASANT
DRAV
LOCH
BLST
SIL
VER
ETTE
LOCH
NOROCO
LIND
SEY
AVON
MA
RY LN
DR
HOLBROOK
REDMAN
ROSEHEDGE DR
MINES
5600D
R
DRLOMOND
DR
MCNEESHA
NEY
TRITON
WY
DR AN
D
ST NOROCO
BLVDRED
BIRD
DR
DR
WINODEECARRON
DRDR
ROCKNE
8600
SAN
DLO
CK
VELA
EGLI
SE
ADVENT
WINODEE
PIC
OVI
STA
PIC
O ST
WAM
PLER
ST
AV LOCH AVON
PL UN
SE
R
ALDRICH RINCON
ST
9100 RIM
BAN
K
MORRILL
6500
MILNAAVSTSTGOODBEE BLVD
AV
DR
DAN
BY
HAVENWOOD
AV
ST GLENCANNON
TOWNLEY
COSGROVE
RD C
ITR
ON
ELL
AV
ST
REICHLING
BALFOUR STST
STCOOLHURST
DR
BEXLEYPLPI
ON
EER
6400
6200
CROSSWAY
ST DICKY
6500
AV
DR
AV
BALFOUR
DR
DRDR
ROSE
LIND
SEY
DR
DR DRBRADHURST
AV
AV
6600
LOCH
DALEB
URY
DR9700 10600
AV
AV6600ST
AV LEM
ORA
N
HEDG
E
10800
CANDAC
E AV
8500 LIN
DEL
L
VALE
PHAE
TON
ST6100
AVGUILD
LOMOND
AV
AV
DR
610070
00
ALDRICH
JOAN
AVRDDR68
00BOLL
ENBAC
HER
RRCOOLHURST
AV
AVAV
TOWNLEY
LN
AV 6500KE
LTO
NVIE
W
BIRC
HLEA
F
CRO
SSW
AY
ST
ROSE
RO
CKN
ECANDLEWOOD
DR
GOODBEE DUNLAPDR
6800
HOMEBROOK ST
DR
BONN
IE
RIVIERA
LEO
NA
MORRILL
6300
RDCARRON
ST
REICHLING
HEDGE
ALDRICH
LN
MAN
ZANAR
ST HILLCREST
WINCHELL 10800
AVLNDR DR
EGLI
SECO
RD
CROSSING
SOUT
HPASS
ON
S
RIMBANK
DR DRMARJORIE
ST DRLNHOMEBROOK
DRBEL AIRE
HILL
S
HADLE
ROSE
MEA
D68
00
EL DORADO
POIN
TTERRAZAS WYTOW
NLEY
STRIESHEL RDPINE
SALEN
E
STMINES
AV AV
LNLN9400 ALLERTO
N
BEQ
UETTE
9000DR
HANEYST TAMAR
A
T
CYPR
ESS
ST
GROVEROSE
CARRON
LN DR
LNVICKI
10900
AVLOCH
COOLHURST
ST TORRE
Y 1 WILDFLOWER LN
LN
GLENGARRY
ST
TER
HEDGE
GOODBEE
LINDSE
Y
ST
7100PL
DR
1
DR
10900
AV
LN WAMPLER
6600
DR
PRIMROSE9600
ORC
HID
BRADHURST
DR
DICKY
CAM
ELLI
A
MIL
LUX
DR
VALE
CITRONEL
L
PEBB
LE B
EACH
BONNI
E
DRALDRICH
9400
AVNAN STLOCHINVAR
STSARAGOSA
BOERCT NANINDIAN WELLS
COOLHURST DR
BALFOUR
LEM
ORAN
DANBY AV
11100BLVD
AVBLO
SSO
M
ST9200 E
AV9000CANFORD
PIC
OVI
STA
WASHINGTON
CO
RD
AV
ALLERTON
STAVRUSHMORE
AV DR 9400DANBRIDGE
9200 COOLHURST
WINCHELL
AV
RD
STST
7000
DRLOCHINVAR
CULLY
6900
AV
STFLORY
ST NORWALK
FOXBURY DR
7100
NAN BARTLEYSARAGOSA
9400ST
8400
AV
ABBOTSFORD
AV
DRAV
BURMA BR
ADW
ELL
KILG
ARRY
STST
CHOISSER
BERT AVRDAV
STCHOISSER
7500ST
ST
ALEN
E
ST
930011500
WYRD
ST VICKI
AV
BLVD
LESCHOOLING
STHAST
Y
7500
BALFOU R
UP7200
BOER
STAV
VANPORT
LIND
ELL
CADDY 7200
GREYFORD
ABBOTSFORD RD
AVST
AV
ST
CT
LOCH
BROADWAY
ST
AV FOXBURY
9600 GERDAST 74
00
BASCOMREX
WINCHELL
ST
RD
VICK
IAV
ST AVRD LOCHINVAR
DR CALLST
ST
CE DDR
9500 GL E
NG
AR
RY
AV AV CHOISSER
LUNDAHLBENAVON
ST
ST
BEQU
ETTE
BLANDING
DU
CH
ESS
CLIFFST
AVWARVALE
RIVERA 7100
7700BASCOM
AV
CRAV
ELL
AV
PIO
NEE
R
BURMAWY
ST
AVRO
CKN
E
ST
7400
ST
AV
EDDYSTONE
ST
MO
RR
ILL
AV
OBERON
ST 9500
EGLI
SE
THO
RN
LAKE
AVAVBERMUDEZ DR AV
7600
RR
STGREYFORD
STST
ST
RDCALL
DR VAN
POR
T AV
RD
7600
WE
STM
AN
VIST
A
FARM
LAND
AV
DRDANB
Y
SERA
PIS
BEN GR
ETN
A
8000
ST
LEAF
STPERKINS LO
CH
ALE
NE
AV
AVON
BASCOM MIL
NA7800
BERMUDEZ
BLVD
AV
AVST
WADDELL
8100ST
AV
HAST
Y
VICKIAV
ST
CO
RD
AV
LIN
DSE
Y
BRAD
WEL
L
STRD9000
MIL
LERG
ROV
E
MA
NZA
NAR
BO ER
BEQ
UETT
E
FLALL
ON
DRSIDE
VIEW
CIT
RO
NEL
L
GODOY
ST
ST
PICO
BEN
NING
TON
STSUMM
ERFIELD
SHADYSID
E
KILG
ARR
Y A
V
SONG
FEST
LEM
OR
AN
DR
BEN AVON
GODOY
BASCOM ST
WOODHUE ST ST
FLAM
INGO
ST
LIND
ENVAL
E
9000 WHEELOCK
KIL-BERMUDEZ 8100
WADDELLLOCHINVAR
AV AV AV STGAR
RY
AV
AV
RD
LEM
OR
AN
NAN ST
SH
ADYS
IDE
STCIR ABBOTSFORD
ST POINCIANAST
AV
7697
DR
RDBURKE
AV
ST
AV
REE
VE
BLVD
RE
XA
LL
CO
RD
AVRD
BLVD
7900
RIVERAST V C
IR
NSVI
STA
BEQ
UET
TE
DO
NN
YBR
OO
K
SLAU RD
V RP
RR
OAD
WAY
MA
N
LRFI
ELD A
V
605
CO
PICO RIVERA
CO
MONTEBELLO
WHITTIER
Pico County Water District
1:16,000 LAFCOLAFCO
September 5, 2003
LegendRoads, Thomas Bros.Pico County Water District(SOI same as district boundry)
0 0.25 0.50.125Miles
November 2005 – Final Report 38
Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 2015 E. Hatchway Street
Compton, CA 90222 Contact: Theresa Johnson, Office Manager Phone: (310) 631-8176; (310) 632-5492 fax Email/Website: None Type: Retail Water
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
0.5 sq miles 5,952 5,952 5,952 5,952
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee Average Daily Demand (MGD) NP Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NP No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: NP No. of Pump Stations: NP No. of Pressure Zones: NP Storage Capacity 50,000 gal Financial Information (FY 2005-2006) (in thousands)
Revenues: $732.1 Expenses: $660.0 Reserves: $133.1 CIP: 0
Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill (3/4” meter, 20 ccf)
Meter Chg 0 Water Chg: $41.00 Monthly Bill: $41.00
Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic 1,488 0 0 1,488 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 1,488 0 0 1,488 Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 0 0 0 0 0 Groundwater 828 828 828 828 828 Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 828 828 828 828 828 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential 828 828 828 828 828 Comm/Ind. 0 0 0 0 0 Landscape/Irr 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total 828 828 828 828 828
CO
COMPTON
PLUM ST
*****
BLISS ST
E ORIS ST
CRESSEY ST
E PIRU ST
AN
ZAC
AV
W 130TH ST
N P
AU
L SE
N A
V
VESTA AV
PEACH ST
E 130TH ST
E STOCKWELL ST
UP R
R
S ARA
NBE AV
N G
RA
PE
AV
HATCHWAY ST
W 137TH ST
E LUCIEN ST
S LARG
O AV
S MO
NA BLV
D
PEAR ST
METR
O BLU
E LINE & U
P RR
KNOPF ST
SHAUER ST
E NORD ST
CULVER
AV
S WILLO
WBR
OO
K AV
N M
ON
A B
LVD
W STOCKWELL ST
W 131ST ST
W 134TH PL
W 134TH ST
W 136TH ST
W 132ND ST
W 133RD ST
W 138TH ST
N TA
MA
RIN
D A
V
E WAYSIDE ST
FIG ST
E 131ST ST
N W
ILM
ING
T ON
AV
E 132ND ST
E 133RD ST
PENR
OSE AV
MEALY ST
N W
ILLOW
BRO
OK AV
S OLEAN
DE
R AV
N O
LEA
ND
ER
AV
E 135TH ST
N A
RA
NB
E AV
139TH ST
N AC
ACIA AV
W NORD ST
GR
AH
AM
AV
DOUGLAS AV
N LARGO
ST
W WINONA AV
E WINONA AV
N K
EM
P A
V
N M
ATTHIS
EN
AV
E 134TH ST
N ALAM
EDA
ST
HO
LME
S A
V
BA
ND
ER
A A
V
AR
ANB
E AV
*****
N W
ILM
ING
T ON
AV
*****
W 138TH ST
****
*
*****
E ORIS ST
S OLEAN
DER AV
E LUCIEN STE 131ST ST
W 130TH ST
*****
S WILLO
WBR
OO
K AV
*** *
*
N W
ILLOW
BRO
OK AV
E PIRU ST
****
*
HATCHWAY ST
BLISS ST
****
*
W 131ST ST
Sativa County Water District1:5,000 LAFCOLAFCO
November 3, 2003
LegendRoads, Thomas Bros.Sativa CWD(SOI same as district boundary)
0 0.1 0.20.05Miles
November 2005 – Final Report 40
Water Replenishment District of Southern California Agency Information Service Area Information Address: 12621 East 166th Street
Cerritos, CA 90703 Contact: Robb Whitaker, General Manager Phone: (562) 921-5521; (562) 921-6101 Email/Website: [email protected] www.wrd.org Type: Groundwater Management
Service Area Population Served: Projected Population:
2010 2015 2020
420 sq mi 3,575,000
System Information No. of Employees: NP No. of Connections per Employee NA Average Daily Demand (MGD) NA Maximum Day Demand (MGD) NA No. of filed Complaints in past 12 Months NP Miles of Pipe: NA No. of Pump Stations: NA No. of Pressure Zones: NA Storage Capacity NA Financial Information (FY 2002-2003) (in thousands)
Revenues: $30,597.9 Expenses: $30,175.7 Reserves: $6,468.4 CIP: $11,700.0
Wholesale Water Rates per acre-foot (eff. July 1, 2005) Replenishment $134.66 per acre-foot Service Connections
Within Boundary
Outside Boundary/Within
Sphere Outside Sphere
Total
Domestic NA NA NA NA Agriculture NA NA NA NA Recycled NA NA NA NA Other NA NA NA NA Total NA NA NA NA Supply Information (AF/Yr) Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Imported 57,631 57,631 57,631 57,631 57,631 Groundwater 0 0 0 0 0 Surface 77,309 77,309 77,309 77,309 77,309 Recycled 0 0 0 0 0 Total 134,940 134,940 134,940 134,940 134,940 Average Annual Demand Information (AF/Yr)
Existing 2005 2010 2015 2020 Residential NA NA NA NA NA Comm/Ind. NA NA NA NA NA Landscape/Irr NA NA NA NA NA Other NA NA NA NA NA Total NA NA NA NA NA
CO
LOS ANGELES
LONG BEACH
CO
CARSON
CO
CO
TORRANCE
CO
CO
WHITTIERCO
DOWNEY
INDUSTRY
CO
COMPTON
WALNUT
CO
NORWALK
CO
CO
CERRITOS
CO
CO
LAKEWOOD
WEST COVINA
LA MIRADA
INGLEWOOD
DIAMOND BARPICO RIVERA
CO
MONTEBELLO
VERNON
GARDENA
SOUTH GATE
COMMERCE
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
BELL
LYNWOOD
HAWTHORNE
BELLFLOWER
SANTA FE SPRINGS
MONTEREY PARK
EL SEGUNDO
CULVER CITY
CO
PARAMOUNT
CO
CO
REDONDO BEACH
CO
LA HABRA HEIGHTS
LA PUENTE
CO
EL MONTE
LOMITA
POMONA
CO
ROLLING HILLS
MANHATTAN BEACH
ROSEMEAD
PALOS VERDES ESTATES
ARTESIA
CO
SIGNAL HILL
CO
BELL GARDENS
SOUTH EL MONTE
CUDAHY
MAYWOOD
BEVERLY HILLS
CO
CO
CO
LAWNDALE
HUNTINGTON PARK
LOS ANGELES
ROLLING HILLS ESTATES
LONG BEACH
HERMOSA BEACH
SANTA MONICA
CO
CO
CO
COHAWAIIAN GARDENS
ALHAMBRA BALDWIN PARK
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
LONG BEACH
CO
SAN DIMAS
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
WHITTIER
CO
CO
CO
CO
INGLEWOOD S M
AIN
ST
S F
IGU
ER
OA
ST
AV
ALO
N B
LVD
S B
RO
AD
WA
Y COLIMA RD
W PICO BLVD
CR
EN
SH
AW
BLV
D
FLORENCE AV
ALONDRA BLVD
CH
ER
RY
AV
IMPERIAL HWY
TELEGRAPH RD
VENICE BLVD
FIRESTONE BLVD
E 7TH ST
GAGE AV
PIO
NE
ER
BLV
D
ARTESIA BLVD
WHITTIER BLVD
PR
AIR
IE A
V
E WILLOW ST
W SLAUSON AV
WILSHIRE BLVD
E CARSON ST
S V
ER
MO
NT
AV
190TH ST
S LA
BR
EA A
V
E OLYMPIC BLVD
WE
STE
RN
AV
CA
RM
EN
ITA
RD
DEL AMO BLVD
CULV
ER B
LVD
AN
ZA A
V
E SPRING ST
ATLA
NTI
C A
V
NO
RW
ALK
BLV
D
LAK
EW
OO
D B
LVD
RO
SEM
EAD
BLV
D
S N
OR
MA
ND
IE A
V
E 4TH ST
S L
A C
I EN
EG
A B
L VD
RODEO RD
SLAUSON AV
AMAR RD
STU
DE
BA
KE
R R
D
GAR
FIEL
D AV
W CENTURY BLVD
VIS DEL M
AR
S S
OT
O S
T
BE
LLF
LOW
ER
BLV
D
SOUTH ST
E VALLEY BLVD
S S
AN
PE
DR
O S
T
N GRAND AV
CO
MP
TON
AV
W EL SEGUNDO BLVD
S ATLANTIC BLVD
N L
AK
EW
OO
D B
L VD
E 223RD ST
WORKMAN MILL RD
ING
LEW
OO
D A
V
N S
TU
DE
BA
KE
R R
D
HA
WT
HO
RN
E B
LVD
LEFFINGWELL RD
TORRANCE BLVD
E CAMERON AV
N B
ELL
FLO
WE
R B
LVD
E 3RD ST
W VERNON AV
E 1ST ST TEMPLE AV
PALOS VERDES DR S
VA
LLE
Y V
IEW
AV
BEVERLY BLVD
LA M
IRA
DA
BLV
D
ROSECRANS AV
MILLS AV
S S
AN
TA F
E A
V
N LO
NG
BEA
CH
BLVD
WASHINGTON BLVD
WIL
MIN
GTO
N A
V
W FLORENCE AV
E SLAUSON AV
N G
AF
FEY
ST
PACIFIC COAST HWY
E WASHINGTON BLVD
LOMITA BLVD
S H
AC
IEN
DA
BLV
D
E DEL AMO BLVD
LON
G B
EAC
H B
LVD
CARSON ST
SEPULVEDA BLVD
W 25TH ST
PALO
S VE
RDE
S DR
W
W 9TH ST
PA
CIF
IC B
LVD
PECK RD
S P
AC
IFIC
AV
BANDINI BLVD
S FA
IRFA
X A
V
MULBERRY DR
LA PUENTE RD
S N
OG
ALE
S S
T
W MANCHESTER AV
S W
ILMI N
GTO
N A
V
S CENTINELA AV
E 2ND ST
E VERNON AV
W ANAHEIM ST
W 223RD ST
BLO
OM
FIE
LD A
V
ALAM
EDA
ST
S A
LAM
ED
A S
T
GARVEY AV
BREA
CAN
YON
RD
E OCEAN BLVD
E ANAHEIM ST
S P
RA
IRIE
AV
STOCKER S
T
S BUNDY DR
CA
LIFO
RN
IA A
V
GOLDEN SPRINGS DR
E SEPULVEDA BLVD
SANTA MONICA BLVD
DIA
MO
ND B
AR B
LVD
W BEVERLY BLVD
GR
AND
AV
DURFEE AV
PASS
ON
S BL
VD
SANTA ANITA A
V
FULL
ER
TON
RD
EA
STE
RN
AV
S E
AS
TER
N A
V
W 190TH ST
W 3RD ST
W OCEAN BLVD
VALL
EY B
LVD
W MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD
W CARSON ST
WESTW
OOD BLVD
S C
EN
TRA
L A
V
S A
ZU
SA
AV
S G
AR
FIE
LD A
V
LA T
IJERA B
LVD
E 103RD ST
E VICTORIA ST
CREST RD
AV
IATI
ON
BLV
D
S C
AT
ALIN
A A
V
E IMPERIAL HWY
E CESAR E CHAVEZ AV
ABBOTT RD
W WILLOW ST
NATIONAL BLVD
W 1ST ST
W LOMITA BLVD
S PAS DL MAR
N E
AS
TER
N A
V
HARBO
R BLV
D
S SUNSET
AV
N LOS C
OYOTE
S DIA
G
S WESTERN AV
E ATHERTON ST
N PUENTE
AV
W ROSECRANS AV
S G
AF
FEY
ST
SAN VICENTE BLVD
BROADWAY
N A
LAM
ED
A S
T
W PACIFIC COAST HWY
S H
OO
VE
R S
T
W COMPTON BLVD
E GARVEY AV
N A
VA
L ON
BLV
D
W 6TH ST
WASHINGTON PL
E AMAR RD
GR
EE
NLE
AF
AV
N SUNSET
AV
E COMPTON BLVD
CENTINELA AVW JEFFERSON BLVD
N LA
BRE
A AV
W CENTINELA AV
POTRERO GRANDE DR
S AL
VAR
ADO
ST
AZU
SA A
V
FIGU
ER
OA
ST
AIR
PO
RT
BL V
D
N P
AR
AM
OU
NT
BLV
D
N C
EN
TR
AL
AV
E PACIFIC COAST HW
Y
W 4TH ST
S GRAND AV
E WARDLOW RD
S P
AC
IFI C C
OA
ST H
WY
ANITA ST
PA
RA
MO
UN
T B
LVD
W TEMPLE ST
S GLE
NDORA AV
SA
NTA
FE
AV
E FLORENCE AV
REDONDO BEACH BLVD
W GARVEY AV
S LO
RENA
ST W RIGGIN ST
MARINA EXWY
TURN
BULL
CAN
YON R
D
E 6TH ST
W MANCHESTER BLVD E FIRESTONE BLVD
W 7TH ST
W IMPERIAL HWY
E LOMITA BLVD
S IN
GLE
WO
OD
AV
HARRY BRIDGES BLVD
S A
VIA
TIO
N B
L VD
MARENGO ST
SO
TO S
T
N P
AC
IFI C
AV
RUSH ST
FAIR
WA
Y D
R
N D
IAM
ON
D B
AR B
LVD
E ARTESIA BLVD
W POMONA BLVD
N MISSION RD
S S
EP
ULV
ED
A B
L VD
W ALONDRA BLVD
E BEVERLY BLVD
E ALONDRA BLVD
W WASHINGTON BLVD
E EL SEGUNDO BLVD
S BE
ACH B
LVD
E ROSECRANS AV
JEFF
ERSON B
LVD
E 9TH STW OLYMPIC BLVD
E CENTURY BLVD
W ARTESIA BLVD
N SEASIDE AV
SHEPARD ST
E 4TH PL
E ANAHEIM ST
VALLEY BLVD
E CARSON ST
S SA
N PE
DRO
ST
VALLEY BLVD
W ANAHEIM ST
E AMAR RD
E 7TH ST
W ROSECRANS AV
SA
NTA
FE
AV
PARA
MO
UNT
BLVD
W FLORENCE AV
WASHINGTON BLVD
S G
RAN
D A
V
W OLYMPIC BLVD
ROSECRANS AV
S W
ES
TE
RN
AV
VALLEY BLVD
E VALLEY BLVD
GA
RFI
ELD
AV
DURFEE AV
CR
EN
SH
AW
BL V
D
ATL
AN
TIC
AV
W OLYMPIC BLVD
WIL
MIN
GTO
N A
V
W IMPERIAL HWY
S A
LAM
ED
A S
T
BLO
OM
FIE
LD A
V
E WASHINGTON BLVD
AMAR RD
W 7TH ST
GARVEY AV
S S
AN
TA F
E A
V
W MANCHESTER AV
E PACIFIC COAST HWY
ARTESIA BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
E IMPERIAL HWY
S E
AS
TER
N A
V
S W
ES
TE
RN
AV
S C
EN
TRA
L A
V
NO
RW
ALK
BLV
D
W ALONDRA BLVD
WHITTIER BLVD
WILSHIRE BLVD
E DEL AMO BLVD
SOUTH ST
S A
ZU
SA
AV
W JEFFERSON BLVD
S CEN
TRAL
AV
Water Replenishment Districtof Southern California
1:160,000
LAFCOLAFCO
June 1, 2005
LegendRoads, Thomas Bros.
Water Replenishment Districtof Southern California(SOI same as district bondary)
0 2 41Miles
D:\GIS\mxd\wrd\water_rep_dist.mxd
Hearing Action COC Effective Date Date
Formation 12-09-5905-11-83 Sphere of Influence Established 05-11-83 District Name Change 11-07-91
District History
Local Agency Formation Commissionfor
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 42
3.0 ANALYSIS 3.1 GROWTH AND POPULATION
3.1.1 Growth/Population Projections The growth projections shown below in Table 3-1 Growth and Population Projections are derived from two sources: data submitted by the agencies and data based on SCAG 2004 forecasts, where available.
Table 3-1: Growth and Population Projections Agency Data
Source 2000
Population Estimates*
2005 Population Estimates*
2010 Population Estimates*
2015 Population Estimates*
2020 Population Estimates*
Annual Growth
Rate Retail – Cities Cerritos SCAG 51,705 54,433 54,756 54,936 55,112 0.33% Compton SCAG 93,873 97,137 97,378 100,864 104,304 0.56% Downey SCAG 107,821 112,635 114,177 116,582 118,957 0.52% Huntington Park SCAG 61,597 65,163 67,094 69,255 71,383 0.79% Lakewood SCAG 79,669 82,872 83,747 84,419 85,083 0.34% Long Beach SCAG 463,406 489,528 503,450 518,627 533,590 0.76% Lynwood SCAG 71,765 73,544 75,067 76,755 78,424 0.62% Norwalk SCAG 103,716 109,673 111,255 114,009 116,729 0.63% Paramount SCAG 55,493 57,529 57,879 61,477 65,025 0.86% Pico Rivera SCAG 63,686 66,534 67,523 69,389 71,231 0.59% Santa Fe Springs SCAG 17,501 17,547 18,263 19,113 19,949 0.70% Signal Hill SCAG 9,425 10,388 10,558 11,415 12,260 1.50% South Gate SCAG 96,772 103,516 108,757 113,085 117,355 1.06% Vernon SCAG 91 94 95 96 97 0.33% Whittier SCAG 83,997 87,073 88,085 89,577 91,049 0.42% Unincorporated Area Unincorporated SCAG 318,212 339,087 352,027 369,720 387,168 1.08% Total – Gateway Region 1,678,729 1,766,753 1,810,111 1,869,319 1,927,716 0.65%
Retail – Special Districts La Habra Heights CWD Agency 6,450 6,496 6,543 6,589 6,635 0.14%
Orchard Dale WD Agency 17,976 20,013 22,281 24,805 27,616 2.15% Pico WD Agency 27,000 30,206 30,260 30,317 30,390 0.63% Sativa-LA CWD Agency 5,952 5,952 5,952 5,952 5,952 0.00%
(*) Data sources include data reported in the LAFCO Request for Information, Parts I, II and III. Additional information was obtained from Urban Water Management Plans provided by the agencies. NP – data not provided; NA – not available
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 43
The Gateway region includes a broad range of urban land uses, densities, and development intensities. Residential land use varies from high-density infill to low density single family residences on small lots. Commercial and industrial enterprises within the region generate significant water demand due to operations and manufacturing processes with demand fluctuating due to economic conditions. The Gateway region is mature, and generally considered built-out. The modest growth projected over the next twenty years will primarily be a result of infill and redevelopment. There is a trend to rezone some single-family residential for multi-family use. Overall Los Angeles County experienced a 12% population increase from 1990 to 2000, with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) projecting an overall 19% increase through 2020. Growth within the Gateway region is expected to be approximately 13% through 2020, less than the county-wide average.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 44
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
2002 2005 2010 2015 2020
acre
-feet
/yea
r
200,000
550,000
900,000
1,250,000
1,600,000
1,950,000
2,300,000
popu
latio
n
Supply Demand Population
3.2 INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES The evaluation of infrastructure needs and deficiencies includes an analysis of both water supply and water system capacity. The following figure, Figure 3.1 Supply/Demand Forecast - Based on Population Projections, shows the estimated supply and demand based on data reported by the water agencies in the Gateway MSR study area as well as SCAG population projections. The questionnaire submitted to the agencies by LA LAFCO did not request projections for supply and demand; therefore the data has been obtained from the agencies’ 2000 Urban Water Management Plans and other supporting documentation. It is recommended that the agency profiles in Section 2.0 be updated following the completion of the 2005 Urban Water Management Plans in order to maintain accurate agency projections on future supply and demand.
Figure 3.1 – Gateway Region
Supply/Demand Forecast Based on Population Projections
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 45
3.2.1 Water Supply/Demand The Gateway area currently relies on a combination of groundwater, imported, and recycled water to meet demand. Historically the area has relied on groundwater in the Central Basin for supply. However, with no oversight or management and years of overpumping, the groundwater resources diminished. In 1957, the accumulated overdraft in the Central Basin was nearly 1 million acre-feet, and groundwater levels had dropped to below sea level. With the Central Basin Judgment, the area’s groundwater resources have improved due to management controls and programs to ensure sustainable use and water quality. Imported water is supplied by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California through the Central Basin Municipal Water District and the Cities of Long Beach and Compton. Recycled water has become an increasingly important source of supply. The Central Basin MWD purchases recycled water from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts to resell within its service area. The groundwater in the Central Basin is at risk for impacts by seawater; however the Alamitos intrusion barrier effectively protects the Basin from further impacts. In the northern portion of the Basin, extraction wells are removing contaminated groundwater so it does not migrate to the Central Basin’s core aquifers. Groundwater Supply The groundwater source for the Gateway region is the Central Basin. The Central Basin adjudication is 217,367 acre-feet per year. Allowable pumping allocations are limited to 80% of pumping rights. The original judgment allowed for the water purveyors to pump groundwater in excess of replenishment, which caused the basin water quality and supply to deteriorate. To ensure adequate supply, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District has created spreading basins and the Water Replenishment District replenishes the groundwater based on the amount extracted. The judgment includes carryover rights up to 20% such that unpumped water rights may be carried over into the next year. If pumping exceeds 120%, then there is a corresponding reduction in the following year. The 1991 amendment to the judgment included an exemption for contamination extraction. A Conjunctive Use Study that was completed models several pumping scenarios to develop a range of hypothetical impacts to the basin. One of the models includes increasing the pumping allowance to 90% of pumping rights, which would increase allowable extractions by 27,170.9 acre-feet per year. Approximately 25 cities and agencies have expressed interest in participating in a conjunctive use project that would utilize available storage in the Central Basin within the terms and conditions of the exiting Central Basin Judgment. The City of Downey is acting as the lead for this effort. Per the Judgment, a maximum of 40% of the Allowed Pumping Allocation (APA) can be used for storage in the Basin. The proposed project involves installing several Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) wells which would be used to recharge the basin with purchased MWD water during winter months when excess MWD water is available. The stored water would be extracted during periods of drought when MWD deliveries are
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 46
curtailed. The project currently proposes to install several 1,000-1,500 gpm ASR wells. Although the wells would be located in only a few cities, participants in the program would be able to extract the stored water with their own facilities as the Judgment does not limit the extraction of the stored water the area where it was introduced. The estimated cost for design and construction of each well is $1.5 to $2 million. Funding would be sought through a Prop 50 construction grant. Groundwater quality is a continuing concern. Norwalk is currently the lead agency of the Southeast Water Coalition, a JPA of cities working to prevent the migration of groundwater contamination from the Whittier Narrows to the Central Basin. The JPA also cooperates on regional groundwater quality issues. Imported Water Supply The Metropolitan Water District provides imported water from both the State Water Project (SWP) and the Colorado River to the Gateway area through its member agencies, Central Basin MWD and the Cities of Long Beach and Compton. Although SWP Contractors have an assigned allotment each year, the actual amount delivered varies depending on water availability in the Bay-Delta and other northern California sources. For 2004, the southern California contractors received 65% of their prescribed allotment. The southern California SWP contractors actively manage the procurement process to ensure reliability and cost control. Opportunities to use water transfers, banking and off-season deliveries are exercised if they are beneficial to the region and member agencies. The Central Basin MWD relies on MWD for demand projections and ensuring the reliability of imported supply. Recycled Water Supply Recycled water has played an increasingly important role in the Gateway area as it effectively serves to offset potable demand for use in the landscape, industrial processes and other innovative applications. Recycled water is produced by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and is available through the Central Basin MWD in many areas within the Gateway area. The recycled water program has received funding from Metropolitan as well as federal and State grants to finance infrastructure investment and program development. The largest recycled water user is the Water Replenishment District. Balancing Supply and Demand Most of the agencies are using demand management measures to reduce demand, and conservation plays a critical role. Individually and through the wholesaling agencies, the retailers are engaged in conservation programs and activities including public outreach, rebates, education and incentives. The California Water Code Division 6, Sections 10610 et seq., Urban Water Management Planning Act, as amended January 1, 2002 requires all Urban Water Management Plans to be updated in 2005. This
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 47
will provide an opportunity for the agencies to re-evaluate and updated projected population, water supply and demand within their respective service areas. Water supply and demand for each of the public water districts in the Gateway MSR study area is summarized below in Table 3.3 – Supply and Demand Summary.
Table 3.3 – Supply and Demand Summary
(Acre Feet/Year unless otherwise noted)
Agency Existing Supply
Existing Demand Difference
Projected Supply 2020
Projected Demand
2020 Difference
WHOLESALE AGENCIES Central Basin MWD 100,821 100,821 0 100,821 100,821 0
Water Replenishment District
134,940 NA 134,940 NA
RETAIL - CITIES Cerritos 12,769 12,769 0 14,577 14,577 0 Compton 10,000 10,290 (290) 12,500 10,300 2,200 Downey 60,390 18,069 42,321 60,490 20,442 40,048 Huntington Park 5,477 5,477 0 5,756 5,756 0 Lakewood 10,664 9,167 1,497 9,801 9,636 165 Long Beach 76,452 76,452 0 93,371 93,371 0 Lynwood 6,792 NP NP NP Norwalk 2,083 1,909 174 3,680 2,030 1,650 Paramount 8,023 7,327 696 8,899 8,088 811 Pico Rivera 5,843 5,843 0 6,929 6,576 353 Santa Fe Springs 8,728 8,727 1 10,935 10,902 33 Signal Hill 2,187 2,130 57 2,187 3,757 (1,570) South Gate 11,966 11,966 0 NP NP Vernon 11,920 11,223 697 13,600 12,624 976 Whittier 9,645 9,645 0 9,645 NP RETAIL - SPECIAL DISTRICTS La Habra Heights CWD 2,973 2,892 81 2,973 2,489 484
Orchard Dale WD 2,497 2,497 0 2,775 2,775 0 Pico WD 3,732 3,732 0 3,624 3,903 (279) Sativa-LA CWD 828 828 0 828 828 0 Total 45,234 44,871
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 48
3.2.2 Water System Infrastructure In addition to supply and demand, the review of infrastructure includes an evaluation of capacity to serve. Infrastructure for each of the public water agencies in the Gateway MSR study area is summarized below in Table 3.4 – Infrastructure Summary.
Table 3.4 – Potable Infrastructure Summary
Agency # of Service Connections
Miles of Pipe
Pump Stations Tanks/Reservoirs
Total Storage Capacity
Treatment Plant
Capacity # of
Interties
WHOLESALE AGENCIES Central Basin MWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water Replenishment District
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
RETAIL - CITIES Cerritos 15,871 177 NP 3 24 mg NP NP Compton 15,000 160 5 4 12 mg NA 9 Downey 22,915 322 20 1 5 mg NA 5 Huntington Park 6,501 67 5 8 13.67 mg 5,364 af 4 Lakewood 20,418 NP 15 3 10.9 mg NP 3 Long Beach 89,139 900 NP 2 116 mg NP NP Lynwood 9,929 93 NP 1 3 mg NP NP Norwalk 3,418 NP 3 1 0.1 mg 750 af 4 Paramount 7,552 NP NP NP NP NP 3 Pico Rivera 9,351 90 10 3 1 mg NP 2 Santa Fe Springs 5,696 92 2 2 8 mg 4,035 af 1 Signal Hill 2,715 NP NP NP 8 mg NP NP South Gate 14,526 135 3 8 13.52 mg NP 9 Vernon 1,750 49 3 8 16.75 mg 9,000 af 1 Whittier 11,307 3 1 11 33.12 mg NP 4 RETAIL - SPECIAL DISTRICTS La Habra Heights CWD 1,959 60 4 7 12.51 mg 3,800 gpm 2
Orchard Dale WD 4,162 39 2 5 4.5 mg NP 1 Pico WD 5,313 40 7 1 1.25 mg 9,800 af NP Sativa-LA CWD 1,488 NP NP 5 50,000 g NP NP NP – data not provided by agency; NA – not applicable
– CITIES – City of Cerritos The City of Cerritos’ water supply is provided through groundwater, imported water and recycled water. The City has pumping rights to 4,661 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. The City leases
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 49
additional water rights and then supplements with imported water to meet demand. Cerritos wholesales water to the Southern California Water Company, City of Norwalk, and County Water Company. These three entities comprise approximately 24% of total demand. The City has a comprehensive capital improvements program that identifies approximately $2 million in future water projects. The City has emergency interconnections with adjacent water purveyors. The City did not note any deficiencies or needs within the system. City of Compton The City of Compton’s water supply includes both groundwater and imported water. The City has pumping rights to 5,723 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. The groundwater meets drinking water standards and the City does not provide treatment. The City is a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District and has three connections to the Metropolitan system for delivery of treated water. The City leases additional water rights in order to meet demand. The City has an active conservation program that includes education and incentives/rebates. The City has four active wells and one standby well. The four wells are reported in good condition. The City is proposing to construct two new wells in the northeast and northwest sections of the city in order to increase pressure. The system is all gravity fed. The City has the pumping and importing capabilities to serve undeveloped areas within its boundaries, however additional system improvements would be required in order to provide service. The City noted that the water system needs upgrades or replacements for water mains, wells, storage facilities, building structures, and a construction yard. This limits the City’s ability to serve growth, unless the development applicant is responsible for funding necessary upgrades. City of Downey The City of Downey relies on groundwater and recycled water for its water supply. The City has pumping rights to 16,554 acre-feet per year and leases additional water rights as needed to meet demand. The City maintains connections to Central Basin MWD’s imported water system for emergency purposes only. The City has a comprehensive water conservation program that includes rebates and education. The City has 20 active wells with one standby well. The City does not treat the groundwater as it currently meets drinking water standards. Isolated water quality incidents have been resolved. Deeper, high capacity wells will be used to replace older shallow wells. The City is planning to construct a new well in the southeast portion of the City. The District’s storage reservoir was constructed in 1957 and is reported in good condition.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 50
City of Huntington Park The City of Huntington Park has pumping rights to 3,850 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. In 2002-2003 the City leased an additional 630 acre-feet from the City of Norwalk. Groundwater is supplemented with imported water in order to meet demand. The City offers conservation programs in conjunction with the Central Basin MWD. The City has a total of six wells; maximum contaminant levels have been exceeded in two of them. Wellhead treatment facilities have been installed to ensure that the facilities remain in service. The wells are rated in fair and poor condition as are the reservoirs. Current needs include major repairs to four reservoirs and rehabilitation of four wells. The City also needs a new pumping facility in the northern section. Capital projects to address these issues are limited by available funding. City of Lakewood The City of Lakewood has pumping rights to 9,423 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. The City supplements this source with recycled water for irrigation. A water conservation program is used to encourage water use efficiency. The City has 15 wells. The City noted that it has 60 miles of 4-inch unlined cast iron water mains that need to be replaced to increase fire flow capacity and improve water quality. The City plans to gradually replace the mains over the next 15-25 years. In order to control costs, the plan phases the replacement based on leak history and water quality complaints. Two of the City’s three emergency interconnections are fully automated to activate when the water pressure drops in either system. The current Capital Improvement Plan includes four funded water system projects: water main replacement, storage facility rehabilitation, water wells, and hydrogen sulfide removal which will allow the City to increase groundwater production. City of Long Beach The City of Long Beach has pumping rights to over 30,000 acre-feet annually from the Central Basin. This is supplemented by imported water and recycled water in order to meet demand. The Long Beach Water Department is actively engaged in water resource management, including pursuing desalination and conjunctive use. The Department secured a $4.5 million grant from the State of California to construct the Long Beach Conjunctive Use project which will capture excess water in wet years and store it in the Central Basin. A second fully funded project, with the City of Lakewood and Metropolitan, will allow storage of up to 3,600 acre-feet of imported water during normal hydrologic years. An Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) well will be constructed in Lakewood and linked to the Long Beach water distribution system. Lakewood will be able to use the well for normal groundwater operations when it is not being used for conjunctive use operations by Long Beach.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 51
The Department is implementing an aggressive cast-iron replacement program, replacing or lining nearly 107,000 linear feet of outdated water mains. City of Lynwood The City of Lynwood has pumping rights to 5,537 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. The City augments this supply with imported water provided by the Central Basin MWD. The City currently has six wells with a total production capacity of 5,900 gallons per minute. The City is in the process of completing a new Water System Master Plan which will provide a framework for future Capital Improvements. Examples of current capital improvement projects include construction of a well, water meter replacement, improvements to mains and treatment systems, and an imported water connection. Infrastructure needs identified include aging water mains and low pressure areas. The City reported that funding constraints prevented the construction of new facilities and system upgrades. City of Norwalk Norwalk uses groundwater, imported water and recycled water to meet demand. The City has pumping rights to 1,267 acre-feet annually from the Central Basin. In 2002 the City only extracted 579 acre-feet. One well was taken out of service in 1999 due to contamination and the area is now served with imported water. In 2003 the City subleased 630 acre-feet of pumping rights to the City of Huntington Park with no carryover. The City currently has three active wells. In cooperation with the US Army Corps of Engineers, the City has begun the design of 3.3 million gallon reservoir that will be constructed on City-owned property. A new pumping facility is also being designed, to be constructed in the vicinity of the new reservoir. A new water well will be added as well as connection pipelines and connections to the high pressure fire pipeline. Current projects include valve replacement, a water sampling station and emergency interconnections. The City is also working with the Water Replenishment District through the State’s Safe Drinking Water Program to design and construct a filtration system to treat one well. The WRD is providing 75% of the funding. City of Paramount The City of Paramount relies on groundwater and imported water as its sources of supply. The City has pumping rights for 5,883 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. In addition, the City has an allotment of 2,288 acre-feet per year for imported water from the Central Basin MWD. The City does offer a water conservation program.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 52
The City has two wells; water quality is an issue as manganese levels have exceed the maximum contaminant limits. Recycled water is available within the City through the Central Basin MWD’s recycled water system. The City maintains three interconnections with the Long Beach Water Department, including both groundwater and imported water. The interconnections are an alternate source for when the Central Basin MWD’s connections are shut down for maintenance or repair. The connections are also a potential emergency source. The City has a Capital Improvements Program and has budgeted for improvements to the water system. City of Pico Rivera The Pico Rivera Water Authority (PRWA) relies on groundwater for its primary source of supply, supplemented by imported water. PRWA has pumping rights to 5,579 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. To augment this supply the Authority leases water rights if needed. PRWA has ten active wells which are treated for chlorination and fluoridation. The City noted that it has sufficient capacity to service any potential new connections in the central and northern zones of the system. There are three standby wells in the northern zone. PRWA is upgrading the electrical panels in the pumping plants which are 30 to 50 years old. Some older water mains in the northern zone of the system need to be replaced. Current capital projects include security fencing around wells, groundwater testing and remediation, and general upgrades such as meter and water main replacement and reservoir upgrades. PRWA has emergency interconnections with the City of Whittier and the San Gabriel Valley Water Company. In 2000 the City was awarded the Bronze Medal for the quality and taste of its municipal water. City of Santa Fe Springs The City of Santa Fe Springs primarily serves a commercial/industrial customer base. The City’s water supply is comprised of groundwater, imported water, and recycled water. The City has pumping rights for 4,035 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. The City has vacant land; approximately 200 acres within the City’s water service area are currently unserved. Conservation programs are offered in conjunction with the Central Basin MWD. The City expects that domestic water use will decrease as some industrial uses convert to recycled water. The City noted that a new well is needed, although planning has not occurred yet. In addition, two water wells need to be replaced; one is planned and funded, the other is unfunded. The City has an emergency connection with the City of Cerritos which is pressure actuated and flows in both directions. Current approved capital projects include a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system; water main extensions, update of the Water System Master Plan, and a recycled water main extension.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 53
City of Signal Hill The City of Signal Hill has pumping rights to 2,022 acre-feet annually. In response to expected increases in demand, Signal Hill recently completed a feasibility study for recycled water that identifies potential customers, facilities needed, and an includes an economic analysis. In September 2005 the City is changing its disinfection treatment from chlorine to chloramines. The City has four current Capital Improvement Projects, including a 12-inch Hilltop Loop Line, adding an additional pressure water loop on the Hilltop, the Temple Avenue Reservoir and Pump Station, and the Gundry well valve replacement. The roof will be replaced on the Gundry Reservoir in fall 2005 which will require the facility being taken out of service for five months City of South Gate The City of South Gate uses groundwater as its primary source of supply, supplemented by recycled water for industrial and irrigation use. The City has pumping rights to 11,183 acre-feet annually from the Central Basin. Additional water rights are leased as needed to meet demand. The City has nine active wells and three standby wells. Treatment is provided on four of the wells for VOCs. The City is planning to construct a new well to replace two existing wells. New storage facilities with a capacity of 1.8 million gallons will be added as well. In 1996 the City completed a Master Planning study that addresses the water system along with other infrastructure. The City has nine emergency connections with adjacent water purveyors. The 2005-2006 Capital Improvements Program includes funding for a reservoir fuel tank replacement and water well site improvements. City of Vernon The City of Vernon relies on groundwater from the Central Basin as its primary source of supply. In 2003 the City began using imported water from the Central Basin MWD to supplement supply. The City has pumping rights to 8,039 acre-feet annually and leases additional water rights as needed. The City has an allotment of 3,010 acre-feet annually for imported water. Water conservation services are not provided. The City has exceeded the action level for perchlorate and the Maximum Contaminant Level for 1,2 DCA. The City is considering adding treatment facilities for these two contaminants. The City has a direct connection to the Metropolitan feeder pipeline, which can serve as an emergency supply in the event of a major power outage. The City’s water system has a Class 1 rating from the ISO, the highest rating available. The City continues to upgrade its water system. Meters are being changed out to ensure accurate readings. A Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system has been added which allows staff to monitor and make changes to distribution and production facilities. Backup power generators have been installed on some of the wells that will provide 72 hours of power in an emergency.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 54
City of Whittier The City of Whittier relies on groundwater for its source of supply, supplemented by recycled water for irrigation use. The City has pumping rights to 895 acre-feet annually from the Central Basin and 8,700 acre-feet from the Main San Gabriel Basin. The City has a water conservation program that offers education and conservation devices. The City has experienced some groundwater quality issues with wells exceeding the maximum contaminant limits for PCE and TCE. The City noted that it needs to replace three reservoirs that have a capacity of 8 million gallons. Financing and right of way issues are a constraint. One reservoir, constructed in 1931 with a capacity of 9.75 million gallons, has been taken out of service due to safety concerns.
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS –
Central Basin Municipal Water District The Central Basin Municipal Water District is a member of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and serves as a wholesale provider for imported water in the Gateway region. The District is closely related to, and shares administrative facilities with the West Basin Municipal Water District. Central Basin MWD’s service area overlies the adjudicated Central Basin. Although the District does not have groundwater rights, it is actively involved in the management of the Basin, including replenishment and conjunctive use. Groundwater is intended to be the primary water source in the area, with imported water used as a supplement. Groundwater and recycled water effectively meet a significant portion of the area’s water demands. Central Basin MWD provides imported water to 24 cities as well as numerous mutual water companies, investor-owned utilities, water districts and private companies within its service area. Most of these entities has its own connection to the Metropolitan system or takes delivery through an adjoining agency; Central Basin MWD does not store, treat or physically deliver any of the imported water. Central Basin MWD relies on Metropolitan for planning, forecasting future demand, and maintaining a reliable supply. In the early 1990’s the Central Basin MWD expanded its services to include aggressive programs for water conservation and water recycling. Demand for recycled water is growing for use in a variety of applications such as landscape irrigation, cooling towers, refineries, street sweeping, and toilet flushing. The Central Basin MWD’s infrastructure is primarily related to its recycled water delivery system and groundwater protection. The imported water treatment and delivery system is under the purview of Metropolitan. Contaminated groundwater from the San Gabriel Basin has entered the Central Basin. The District is constructing a capture well system to prevent the contamination from migrating further south
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 55
into the main Central Basin aquifers. The project includes 3 capture wells, a pump station, pipelines to dispose of the water, and treatment facilities to meet drinking water quality standards. La Habra Heights County Water District The La Habra Heights CWD has pumping rights to 2,498 acre-feet annually from the Central Basin. The District augments this supply with imported water from the Central Basin MWD. The District has four wells in production and the booster plant was constructed in 2000. All facilities are in good condition. The District has emergency interties with the California Domestic Water Company and the Suburban Water Company. The La Habra Heights CWD service area is divided into upper and lower service zones. La Habra Heights and the Orchard Dale WD have jointly constructed two new wells and a 4 million-gallon reservoir. La Habra Heights is planning to construct additional storage facilities for the upper zone. Other recommendations in the District’s Master Plan include replacing three older wells within the next ten years, upgrade or replace booster pump stations when efficiency falls below 65%, install backup power generators, and construct distribution system improvements to increase fire suppression capabilities in specific areas. The District has received a Class 1 ISO rating for its water system, the highest rating available. Orchard Dale Water District The Orchard Dale WD relies on both groundwater and imported water. The District has pumping rights for 1,107 acre-feet of groundwater and has a base allocation of 1,750 acre-feet per year for imported water through Central Basin MWD. In 2002, the District only extracted 1,002 AF of groundwater and took deliver of 1,359 acre-feet of imported water, well below its allotment. The District uses the conservation programs offered by the Central Basin MWD. Recycled water from the Central Basin MWD is expected to be available in Orchard’s service area before 2010. The District’s treatment facilities were constructed in 1973 and are in good condition. The District has five reservoirs for potable storage, constructed between 1959 and 1973; all are in good condition. In addition to the joint facilities constructed with the La Habra Heights CWD, Orchard Dale has also built a new District office and maintenance facility, installed new disinfection equipment, upgraded two pump stations, and replaced control valves at reservoirs and at the MWD connection. The District has also installed new system operating controls with security enhancements. The District has one emergency intertie with the Suburban Water Company. No infrastructure needs or deficiencies were noted by the District, and there are no areas with excess capacity.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 56
Pico Water District The Pico Water District relies on groundwater for its source of supply. The District holds pumping rights for 3,624 acre-feet per year. In the future, the District will require new development to secure additional water rights as a condition of approval. The District does not provide water conservation services and expects that water demand will increase to 3,900 acre-feet per year due to redevelopment within its service area. The District has seven wells; six are in good condition and have no contamination. The seventh well is no longer used due to high iron levels and radon. The storage reservoir was constructed in 1959 and is in good condition. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District The Sativa-Los Angeles CWD is dependent on groundwater for its source of supply. Sativa has pumping rights for 474 acre-feet per year and leases additional water rights to meet demand of 828 acre-feet. The District does not provide water conservation services. The District has four treatment plant locations and has three active wells with one inactive well. The treatment facilities were constructed in 1938 and are reported in good condition. The District received a grant from the Central Basin MWD for reconstruction of a water tank. The District noted that water mains need to be upgraded, relocating services from the rear of properties and alley ways in order to prevent structures being built over service lines. This would also improve access for routine service and emergencies. Water Replenishment District of Southern California The Water Replenishment District is responsible for groundwater management in the West and Central Groundwater Basins. As such, it provides groundwater recharge programs as well as seawater intrusion barriers and groundwater cleanup. The District has an extensive Capital Improvements Program that includes ASR wells, pipelines, desalter expansion, spreading grounds, water treatment facilities and rubber dams on the San Gabriel River. The District partners with other agencies on a number of its projects in order to leverage resources.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 57
3.3 FINANCING CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES
3.3.1 Revenue Source and Funding The water agencies included in this service review receive the majority of their revenue from water sales and user fees and charges. Most are operating as an enterprise activity such that revenues are expected to cover all water utility related expenses. However, escalating costs associated with personnel and benefits as well as cost increases for water purchases represent common financing constraints. Rate stabilization is a priority, and the agencies are not always able to pass on the full incremental cost increase within a given year. In additional to internal cost increases, the agencies are subject to the pressures of revenue changes implemented by outside agencies. The State budget act of 2004 significantly changed how local revenues are allocated. Each of the cities will be required to contribute to the State’s general fund for FY 2004-2005 and FY 2005-2006, which may impact the water utilities in some way through inter-fund transfers and more stringent cost allocations. Proposition 1A, approved by voters in November 2004, establishes limitations and protects local revenues from State re-allocations in the future. The impact of the revenue changes in 2004 will likely impact the cities for several years as they seek to recover and restore programs to levels that residents have come to expect. 3.3.2 Revenues and Expenses Comparison
Each of the cities accounts for its water utility service through a proprietary or enterprise fund. This enables them to track direct and related revenue and expenses as well as cost allocations from other municipal departments providing related services. The following Figure 3.2 –2003-2004 Financial Information, compares the revenues, expenses, reserves and capital improvement program costs of each public water agency reviewed. In cases where FY 2004 was not provided, FY 2003 was used. This does not create a material discrepancy for data evaluation as it provides some measure of past financial condition.
Los A
ngele
s LAF
CO
Muni
cipal
Serv
ice R
eview
Rep
ort
Wat
er S
ervic
e – G
atew
ay R
egio
n
Nove
mber
2005
– Fin
al Re
port
58
Figu
re 3.
2 – 20
03-2
004 F
inan
cial In
form
atio
n
-
5,00
0,00
0
10,0
00,0
00
15,0
00,0
00
20,0
00,0
00
25,0
00,0
00
Cerrito
sCompton
Downey Huntington ParkLake
wood Long Bea
chLynwood
Norwalk
Paramount Pico R
ivera
Santa
Fe Springs
Signal Hill
South G
ate
Vernon
Whittier
La Hab
ra Hts
CWD
Orchard
Dale
WD
Pico WD
Sativa
- LA C
WD
Centra
l Bas
in MW
D
Water R
eplenish
ment D
istric
t
CIP
Re
serv
es
Expe
nses
Reve
nue
Long
Bea
ch W
ater
Dep
artm
ent
Reve
nue:
$58,9
44,69
0 Ex
pens
es: $
53,42
2,110
Cent
ral B
asin
Re
venu
e: $3
9,078
,600
Expe
nses
: $39
,078,6
00
Wat
er R
eplen
ishm
ent D
istric
t Re
venu
e: $3
0,597
,962
Expe
nses
: $30
,175,6
89
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 59
– CITIES – City of Cerritos The City of Cerritos uses a pay-as-you-go approach for capital improvements to the water infrastructure. As of June 30, 2002, the City had no long term debt associated with its water system. City of Compton The City of Compton borrowed $933,393 for water utility improvements under the State’s Safe Drinking Water Program. The 35-year note has an interest rate of 5%. Payments are due semiannually. Annual debt service through 2007 is $83,328. The outstanding principal at June 30, 2002 was $581,026. City of Downey The City of Downey’s Water Bond indenture that was used to acquire the water system was paid off in 2003. The City intends to use a pay-as-you-go approach for future capital improvements. City of Huntington Park As of June 30, 2002 the City of Huntington Park had no long-term debt attributed to the water utility other than accrued employee benefits. The City noted financing constraints limit the amount of rehabilitation work that can be undertaken. City of Lakewood The City of Lakewood received a loan from the State in 1989 to construct a six-mile recycled water line. The loan has an interest rate of 4.01% and will be paid in full in 2007. In addition, the City sold $6,040,000 in Water Revenue Bonds to finance the acquisition and construction of additions and improvements to the water system. The bond indenture will mature in 2016; the interest rate ranges from 3.75% to 5.70%. Average annual debt service is approximately $568,661. City of Long Beach The Long Beach Water Department uses long term debt to fund major capital projects. The City has a loan from the State Water Resources Control Board; the loan matures in 2008 and bears an interest rate of 4.0128%. The outstanding principal balance as of September 30, 2003 was $627,000. In October 2002 the City approved the issuance of up to $15 million in commercial paper notes. In January 2003, $6 million was issued with interest rates ranging from 0.95% to 1.05% with a term of one year. The financing was used to complete the recycled water system expansion and research and development of the desalination plant prototype and technology. City of Lynwood The City of Lynwood formed the Lynwood Utility Authority as a means of financing capital improvements to the water and sewer system (the sewer is included within the Water Fund). As of June
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 60
30, 2002 the City had $9,494,799 in outstanding Water Revenue bonds. The average annual debt service for the bond indenture is $731,411. City of Norwalk The City of Norwalk uses a pay-as-you go approach for water system improvements and has reserves to meet future capital needs. As of June 30, 2002 the City had no long term debt associated with its water system. City of Paramount The City of Paramount has long-term debt associated with the construction of a well and water production facilities for drought relief. The loan has an interest rate of 5% and is due in November 2017. Annual principal and interest payments are $31,255. The outstanding principal balance at June 30, 2002 was $338,587. City of Pico Rivera In 1999 the City formed the Pico Rivera Water Authority to finance improvements to the water system. The PRWA operates through a joint agreement with the City’s Redevelopment Agency. At June 30, 2002 the PRWA had long-term debt of $86,534,732, which includes two issues of revenue bonds and a capital lease payable. The interest rates on the bonds range from 3.25% to 6.25%. The terms of the bond indentures require that a Water Rate Stabilization fund be maintained with a balance of not less than $600,000 as well as a minimum balance in a Reserve account. The PRWA has $600,000 in the Rate Stabilization Fund and a reserve account of $2,538,122 for this purpose. Average annual debt service for both bond issues is approximately $4.75 million through 2007. City of Santa Fe Springs The City of Santa Fe Springs transfers approximately $1.6 million annually from the Water Fund to the City’s General Fund. The City has issued Water Revenue bonds and had a bonded indebtedness of $3.75 million as June 30, 2002. Interest is payable semi-annually with rates ranging from 4.2% to 5.9%. The debt will be retired by 2026. The agreement requires that water rates be fixed such that net revenues are at least 1.2 times the interest and principal payments of the bonds as they become due and payable. City of Signal Hill The City of Signal Hill has a Water Development Fund for new development, a Water Depreciation Reserve, and a Rate Stabilization Reserve. Projected balances as of June 30, 2004 were as follows:
• Water Fund $18,043,850 • Water Development $1,861,882 • Water Depreciation Reserve $1,274,294 • Rate Stabilization $350,000
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 61
In 1996 the Signal Hill Public Financing Authority issued $10 million of Certificates of Participation to finance the design and construction of two reservoirs and related water system improvements. Interest rates range from 4.8% to 5.7%. All of the certificates mature by 2026. The annual requirements to fully amortize outstanding bond indebtedness as of June 30, 2002 are approximately $696,700. City of South Gate The City of South Gate established the South Gate Utility Authority for the sole purpose of issuing debt on behalf of the City. In 1996 $14,280,000 in Water Revenue Refunding Bonds were issued to retire a 1987 bond indenture and take advantage of lower interest rates. Interest on the bonds ranges from 3.8% to 5.38%. In 2001, $30,965,451 in Subordinate Revenue Bonds were issued by the Utility Authority as a lease payment for the Authority’s right to use the Water Enterprise to finance capital improvements for the sewer system. The outstanding principal balance at June 30, 2004 for both bond indentures was $40,095,451. Average annual debt service including principal and interest through 2009 is $2,746,782. City of Vernon The City of Vernon accounts for its water utility through a proprietary fund. The City maintains reserves for capital projects. City of Whittier The City of Whittier established the Whittier Utility Authority (WUA) to provide greater assurance of the fiscal strength of the City’s enterprise funds. The WUA provides a formal and legally binding framework for the relationship between the City’s utility enterprise funds and the City’s General Fund. In 1993 the City sold $8,635,000 in Water Revenue Bonds, with the proceeds used to retire the 1987 Revenue Bonds and construct a new reservoir. Interest rates range from 2.7% to 5.625%. The outstanding balance as of June 30, 2005 was $1,070,000. Per the terms of the indenture, net water revenues must be equal to at least 1.25 times the aggregate amount of principal and interest.
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS –
Central Basin Municipal Water District The primary sources of revenue for the Central Basin Municipal Water District are water sales (imported and recycled) and standby charges. The District’s financial books and records include a general fund, investment in utility plant fund, bond interest, redemption and reserve fund, the West Basin Financing Corporation and interest in the West and Central Basin Financing Authority. The District finances its capital projects through revenue bonds and Certificates of Participation. Per the audited financial statements for June 30, 2002, Central Basin had $39.1 million in outstanding debt associated with Revenue Bonds having an interest rate ranging from 4.1% to 5.375%.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 62
The West and Central Basin Financing Authority was created on August 1, 1992 through a joint powers agreement between the two districts. The Authority operates the headquarters and administrative building for both West Basin and Central Basin Municipal Water District. At June 30, 2002 Central Basin’s share of the Authority’s total liabilities and net assets was $41,359,124 or approximately 29%. Central Basin has a formal investment policy that is included in its annual budget. The three fundamental criteria are 1) safety of principal, 2) liquidity, and 3) return on investment. The District also has a Designated Funds policy which outlines both unrestricted and restricted funds and their use. The District uses a five year horizon for budgeting to allow for long-term planning. La Habra Heights County Water District The La Habra Heights County Water District receives revenue through water sales, taxes, and investment income. The District has long term debt associated with water system improvements. As of June 30, 2002 the total principal was $1,001,745 with annual debt service of $62,810. Orchard Dale Water District The Orchard Dale Water District’s primary sources of revenue are water sales and service charges. The District established a Capital Improvements Fund in 1995 with the funds to be used to finance the design and construction of capital improvements. In 2001 the District financed the rehabilitation of the La Mirada Conduit with a long term loan from the State of California. The conduit is part of the joint facilities operated for the benefit of Orchard Dale and the La Habra Heights CWD. Orchard Dale is obligated to repay 30.71% of the loan. The 40-year loan has an interest rate of 2.5%. Average annual principal payments through 2007 are $7,282. Pico Water District The Pico Water District’s primary sources of revenue are water sales, charges and interest income. As of December 31, 2002 the District had long-term debt in the amount of $978,876 for Refunding Certificates of Participation. Future maturities peak at $255,000 in 2005, decreasing to $30,000 in 2006. Interest rates range from 2.6% to 5.5%. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District The primary source of revenue for the Sativa-Los Angeles CWD is water sales and service. The District has no long-term debt per its 2003-2004 budget. The District uses a pay-as-you-go approach for improvements and has limited reserves. Based on the data provided by the District, this may be a constraint for implementing the infrastructure improvements noted above.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 63
Water Replenishment District of Southern California The Water Replenishment District is funded through service charges; it receives a small increment of property tax. The District uses a pay-as-you-go approach and had no long-term debt as of June 30, 2003. The District has reserves for future operations and capital needs.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 64
3.4 COST AVOIDANCE AND SHARED FACILITIES OPPORTUNITIES
– CITIES – City of Cerritos Cerritos shares an emergency connection with the City of Santa Fe Springs which is pressure actuated and flows in both directions. Cerritos is currently the lead agency of the Southeast Water Coalition, a JPA of cities working to prevent the migration of groundwater contamination from the Whittier Narrows to the Central Basin. City of Compton Compton is avoiding costs associated with imported water by leasing additional water rights where cost effective. In addition, the City has nine emergency interconnections with adjacent water providers. As a Metropolitan member agency, the City participates in Metropolitan’s Conjunctive Use Agreement with the other member agencies. City of Downey Downey has informal agreements with adjacent agencies for sharing personnel, equipment, and materials in the event of an emergency. The City has five emergency connections with adjacent water purveyors. City of Huntington Park The City of Huntington Park shares emergency connections with the City of South Gate, Walnut Park Mutual Water, Southern California Water Company, and Central Basin MWD. City of Lakewood The City of Lakewood has emergency interconnections with the City of Cerritos, Long Beach Water Department, and Southern California Water Company. The City participates in the Southeast Water Coalition. In addition, the City is pursuing a joint project with the City of Long Beach to construct an ASR well to allow for additional water supply storage in the Central Basin. City of Long Beach The City of Long Beach is working with other agencies as part of its water resource management efforts. The City is collaborating with the City of Lakewood and Metropolitan on the construction of an ASR well. The Long Beach Water Department is controlling costs through its preventative maintenance programs and use of strategic objectives to focus department resources.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 65
City of Lynwood The City of Lynwood is controlling costs by developing a new Water System Master Plan which will identify specific needs and timeframes for system improvements. City of Norwalk Norwalk has sought opportunities to share infrastructure and was ready to engage in a joint project with the Park Water and Southern California Water Companies to construct a 3.3 million gallon reservoir. The two private purveyors failed to provide matching funds and canceled the agreement. The City is proceeding on its own. City of Paramount The City of Paramount participates in the Southeast Water Coalition. The City maintains three interconnections to the Long Beach Water Department system for emergency use. City of Pico Rivera PRWA shares facilities with adjacent water agencies through emergency interconnections. PRWA is controlling costs through planned infrastructure improvements and managing its water resources. City of Santa Fe Springs Santa Fe Springs shares an emergency connection with the City of Cerritos which is pressure actuated and flows in both directions. The possibility of sharing a treatment facility may be considered at some point in the future. City of Signal Hill The City o Signal Hill is collaborating with the Central Basin MWD on constructing a recycled water system within the city to meet irrigation and industrial water demands. City of South Gate The City of South Gate has nine emergency interconnections with adjacent water purveyors. The City is controlling costs through the use of its Master Plan and 5-year budgeting timeframe for capital projects. City of Vernon The City of Vernon has installed a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system which will reduce man-hours and production costs. The City also participates in the Southeast Water Coalition JPA and the Conjunctive Use Working Group. City of Whittier The City of Whittier shares emergency connections with the Suburban Water Company, City of Pico Rivera, City of Santa Fe Springs, and San Gabriel Valley Water Company. The City has an agreement
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 66
with the Central Basin MWD to share facilities to distribute treated groundwater to other water purveyors. The City also participates in the Southeast Water Coalition JPA.
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS –
Central Basin Municipal Water District The Central Basin MWD is avoiding costs through its proactive programs for water conservation and water recycling. The District has developed an extensive water recycling program and related infrastructure that cost-effectively provides recycled water for use in a wide range of applications, effectively reducing potable demand. Central Basin MWD shares facilities with a number of other agencies. It shares administrative offices and staff with the West Basin MWD; both agencies are managed by co-general managers. The District purchases recycled water from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. The District actively participates in groundwater management and conjunctive use programs. It provides the primary source of water supply used for groundwater replenishment and in the seawater intrusion barrier. Central Basin MWD has developed programs and protocols that allow the District to capitalize on the programs and infrastructure of other agencies, allowing the District to avoid costs and provide enhanced services to the Gateway region. La Habra Heights County Water District The La Habra Heights CWD and Orchard Dale WD participated in the construction of joint facilities. The two districts have a Joint Facilities Agreement whereby they share the costs of water production, transmission and storage facilities for groundwater. Orchard Dale pays 30.71% of the capital costs. In addition, LHHCWD leases facilities to Orchard Dale to pump their water rights to the Orchard Dale system. Orchard Dale Water District In addition to the cost savings associated with the joint facilities, Orchard Dale is also realizing a significant cost savings in insurance by participating in the ACWA/JPIA. The District is able to provide health benefits for employees as well as participate in pooled risk sharing for property and liability insurance. Pico Water District The Pico Water District participates in the ACWA/JPIA as a means to control liability insurance costs. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District No opportunities were noted.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 67
Water Replenishment District of Southern California The Water Replenishment District shares facilities with a number of agencies to protect and enhance the groundwater resources within the region. This includes the seawater intrusion barriers, desalter project and ASR wells. The District is controlling costs through its Strategic Plan and 5-year CIP.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 68
3.5 MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES
– CITIES – City of Cerritos The City of Cerritos is achieving management efficiencies through its long-range planning and budgeting process. Budget detail for each department includes objectives and workload statistics to track performance over a three year timeframe. City of Compton Compton uses planning documents including an Urban Water Management Plan, Water Master Plan and Capital Improvement Program as tools to manage the water utility. City of Downey Downey was recognized by the American Public Works Association in 2003 with the award for Public Works Director of the Year. The City is achieving additional efficiencies through its resource and operations planning efforts. The Water Utility includes four departments: Supply, Distribution, Customer Service, and Program Support. City of Huntington Park The City of Huntington Park is achieving management efficiencies through its planning efforts and operations. City of Lakewood Lakewood is achieving management efficiencies through its budgeting process, which identifies proposed activities and performance measurements. City of Long Beach The Long Beach Water Department’s mission is re-evaluated by the governing Water Commission annually with strategic objectives set. The Department establishes workplans to accomplish the objectives, and performance is tracked. In addition, the Department uses automated telemetry and supervisory control for operation of water wells, MWD service connections, regulation of reservoir storage, and control of the recycled water system to ensure a high level of system performance. City of Lynwood The City of Lynwood is increasing its efficiencies related to the water utility through the use of telemetry, long range plans, and its Capital Improvement Plan.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 69
City of Norwalk The City of Norwalk is achieving management efficiencies for its water utility through its planning efforts. City of Paramount Paramount utilizes long-range planning efforts and has adopted an Urban Water Management Plan as well as a Capital Improvement Program. These plans serve as tools for efficient management of the City’s water operations. The City has 7 staff certified as Treatment Operators and 4 certified as Distribution Operators with 5 holding an Interim Distribution certification. City of Pico Rivera – Pico Rivera Water Authority The PRWA has 13 staff; with 8 staff certified as Treatment Operators and 8 certified as Distribution Operators. Management efficiencies are achieved through coordination with other city departments and long range plans, such as the Urban Water Management Plan. City of Santa Fe Springs The City of Santa Fe Springs is using its long-range planning and operations to achieve management efficiencies. City of Signal Hill The City of Signal Hill has a Water System Master Plan that is used to guide water utility planning. The City has three budgetary departments for water service: Water Operations, Water Customer Service, and Water Debt Service. Objectives are established in each area to improve productivity and efficiency. City of South Gate The City of South Gate has a Master Plan for its water system, which allows for efficiencies in water system planning. City of Vernon The City of Vernon uses a Programmed Maintenance Management System that improves operational efficiency and productivity. In addition, the Water Department uses the Water Department Information System to log and track work orders. City of Whittier The Whittier City Council establishes goals and objectives during the annual budget process. Specific works plans are then developed by each department. The plans are reviewed and updated at the midpoint and end of the fiscal year. The City last prepared an Urban Water Management Plan in 1995. The City should be submitting an updated plan in accordance with the law.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 70
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS –
Central Basin Municipal Water District The Central Basin Municipal Water District is achieving management efficiencies through the use of operational and management plans. It shares administrative services with the West Basin Municipal Water District, and the two agencies are managed by co-managers. The District uses a five-year planning horizon for budgeting which allows for long-range planning. The District does not have a formal evaluation procedure. Operations are evaluated through the on-going review of operational costs, historic cost comparisons, and projected revenues. The District does perform annual employee evaluations. Each department sets goals for the coming year and regular meetings are held to review progress on goals. La Habra Heights County Water District The La Habra Heights County Water District is achieving management efficiencies through its service order monitoring process that tracks all work per service order. The District has five staff certified in treatment and distribution. Orchard Dale Water District The Orchard Dale Water District operates with seven employees. Four operators are certified in Distribution and Treatment, with one certified in Distribution only. Pico Water District The Pico Water District has adopted an Urban Water Management Plan which provides guidance for water resource management and planning. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District The Sativa-Los Angeles CWD uses performance evaluations and productivity monitoring to track workloads and improve efficiency. The District has one staff certified in treatment and distribution. Water Replenishment District of Southern California The Water Replenishment District has developed a Strategic Plan which is reviewed annually. The review includes measuring progress made on priority projects and programs.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 71
3.6 RATE RESTRUCTURING The following Figure 3.3 - 2005 Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill, compares retail rates from agencies in the Gateway MSR study area.
Figure 3.3 – 2005 Typical Monthly Residential Water Bill
(3/4” Meter and 20 HCF Usage)
$- $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00
La Habra Hts CWD
Signal Hill
Norw alk
Pico WD
Lynw ood
Santa Fe Springs
Orchard Dale WD
Sativa - LA CWD
Huntington Park
Long Beach
Pico Rivera
Whittier
Compton
South Gate
Lakew ood
Vernon
Dow ney
Cerritos
Paramount
Typical Monthly Charge
– CITIES –
City of Cerritos Cerritos uses a two-tiered rate structure that includes a basic rate for a meter plus 10 billing units of water usage. Additional usage is charged at a higher rate.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 72
City of Compton Compton increased water rates effective January 1, 2005. The City has a flat rate structure; water rates in County areas are 1.5 times those of City areas in order to cover the cost of the water mains paid by City residents. City of Downey Downey’s current water rates came into effect in 2000. The City uses a three-tiered rate structure. City of Huntington Park The City of Huntington Park adjusts usage rates annually per the Consumer Price Index for Southern California reported in May of the same calendar year. The most recent rate increase went into effect on July 1, 2005. The City charges a flat rate per unit rate as well as a charge for water maintenance of $0.18 per billing unit. City of Lakewood The City of Lakewood last increased water rates in November 2001. The City uses a flat rate structure. City of Long Beach The City of Long Beach reviews rates annually. Current rates became effective October 1, 2004. The City uses a four-tiered rate structure, with a rate differential in the first tier for residential customers granted an exemption. City of Lynwood The City of Lynwood last increased water rates in 1995. The City has a flat rate structure. City of Norwalk The City of Norwalk increased its water rates in July 2004. The City uses a flat rate structure. City of Paramount The City of Paramount increased water rates effective January 1, 2005. The City uses a two-tiered rate structure, with usage levels determined by three seasons – January through April, May through August, and September through December. The warmer months allow for slightly higher usage at the first tier prices. City of Pico Rivera The City of Pico Rivera increased water rates effective October 1, 2003. The City has a flat rate structure. It also charges a power charge based on the City’s actual cost of power used for pumping during each billing cycle. There is also a surcharge based on changes to the base line amount charged by the Water Replenishment District. In addition, there is an Equipment and Improvement charge of $0.02 per each
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 73
hundred cubic feet of usage. This charge is automatically adjusted each July 1 based on changes in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers for Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange Counties during the prior fiscal year. City of Santa Fe Springs The City of Santa Fe Springs recently increased rates effective September 1, 2005. The City has a three-tiered rate structure for potable water and four tiers for recycled water. City of Signal Hill The City of Signal Hill increased rates 4% in 2004. The City has a three-tiered rate structure. Water rates are reviewed annually; the previous rate increase was in October 2001. City of South Gate The City of South Gate uses a flat rate structure. City of Vernon The City of Vernon increased water rates effective July 1, 2001. The City has a flat rate structure. City of Whittier The City of Whittier adjusts water rates annually each July 1st. The increase is based on the change in the Consumer Price Index. The City uses a flat rate structure.
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS –
Central Basin Municipal Water District The Central Basin Municipal Water District sets rates annually based on changes in the cost of water from Metropolitan or production costs for recycled water. For imported water, Central Basin uses Metropolitan’s rate structure for Tier 1, Tier 2 and seasonal long term storage and adds a surcharge of $37 per acre foot at each level. Metropolitan imposes a Readiness-to-Serve charge which Central Basin passes through to retailers by including it in the commodity rate. The District also charges a capacity reservation charge and monthly water service charge of $30 per cfs (cubic feet per second) as determined by meter capacity. Imported rates as of January 1, 2004 are as follows:
Tier 1: Non-interruptible and Barrier $467/AF Tier 2: Non-interruptible and Barrier $548/AF Seasonal Spreading $270/AF Seasonal Long Term Storage $337/AF
Recycled water is generally more costly to produce and the price often exceeds that of imported water; however Central Basin has received financial incentives from Metropolitan in the past that make recycled
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 74
water more cost-effective. The District reviews recycled water rates annually and has a rate structure that is based on volume and delivery location. The recycled water rates for 2004 range from $290/AF down to $230/AF for tertiary treated water delivered within the Central Basin service area. Rates for water sold outside the Central Basin service area are priced at $20 more per acre foot. La Habra Heights County Water District The La Habra Heights County Water District completed a water rate study in 2001. The District charges a flat rate, but the price differs between the two zones due to energy costs to pump water to the higher zone. Orchard Dale Water District The Orchard Dale WD uses a flat rate structure. A 13% rate increase was instituted in January 2003. Prior rate adjustments occurred in 1993 and 1995. Pico Water District The Pico WD uses a three-tiered rate structure and collects a surcharge to cover unfunded State and Federal mandates, AB 11 costs and power use. Water usage rates have not changed in the past ten years. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District The Sativa-Los Angeles CWD does not have metered accounts and charges a flat rate for water service. The rate was increased 2.5% per month effective July 1, 2005. Water Replenishment District of Southern California The Water Replenishment District reviews its rate annually and makes adjustments based on costs. The District charges a flat per acre-foot rate based on the amount of groundwater extracted.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 75
3.7 GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE OPTIONS Some of the agencies are providing service outside their current boundaries; per Government Code §56133 (e), out of agency agreements that were in place prior to January 1, 2001 do not require LAFCo approval. No alternative government structure options were noted, except as discussed below. The City of Norwalk noted that the City would be better provided if the entire City were serviced by the City’s water utility. This would expand the rate base to allow timely capital improvements while providing lower cost service with high water quality. However, this is not a boundary issue that LAFCO has jurisdiction over as the other purveyors are private entities. The City would need to seek other avenues to expand its service area, such as acquisition or eminent domain. The Central Basin Municipal Water District noted that it is providing recycled water to one connection within its sphere of influence but outside its boundaries. Central Basin should ensure that LAFCO has a current map of all out-of-agency service areas as well as copies of the agreements. The Water Replenishment District is currently evaluating the possibility of annexing areas of the Central Groundwater Basin that are not currently within the District’s boundary. Some areas such as the area between the District’s northern boundary and the Hollywood Groundwater Basin do not have active groundwater management. LAFCO may consider increasing the District’s sphere of influence to include adjacent areas where groundwater resources are not actively managed. Benefits include more effective groundwater management and economies of scale. However, this may result in a new charge for groundwater extracted within the annexing area. Due to the size of its service area, condition of the infrastructure, and financial resources, it is recommended that LAFCO consider adopting a zero sphere of influence for the Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District. The District is adjacent to the City of Compton. The District serves a half-square mile area and is not projecting for any growth. There are no metered accounts and no funding has been allocated for capital improvements. With a zero sphere of influence, the District will continue to operate. However, the area may be added to the sphere of another agency with the objective that eventually service would be provided by the other agency at some point in the future. Los Angles LAFCO should initiate discussions with the District to determine if a reorganization might increase efficiencies and reach economies of scale.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 76
3.8 LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND GOVERNANCE The water utilities are addressed by each City Council during their regular meetings. Local accountability and governance of the cities meets the required standards for public agencies, with appropriate elections and public notice of council meetings and actions. Water utility and water conservation information is available on the city websites.
Table 3.8 City Governance and Local Accountability
City # of
Council Members
Council Meetings Website
Cerritos 5 2nd & 4th Thursdays, 7 pm www.ci.cerritos.ca.us
Compton 5 1st & 3rd Tuesdays, 6:45 pm 2nd & 4th Tuesdays, 2:45 pm www.comptoncity.org
Downey 5 2nd & 4th Tuesday, 7:30 pm www.downeyca.org Huntington Park 5 1st & 3rd Mondays, 6:30 pm www.huntingtonpark.org Lakewood 5 2nd & 4th Tuesdays, 7:30 pm www.lakewoodcity.org Long Beach (see below) www.lbwater.org Lynwood 5 1st & 3rd Tuesdays, 5 pm www.lynwood.ca.us Norwalk 5 1st & 3rd Tuesdays, 6 pm www.ci.norwalk.ca.us Paramount 5 1st & 3rd Tuesdays, 5 or 7 pm www.paramountcity.com Pico Rivera 5 1st & 3rd Tuesdays, 6 pm www.ci.pico-rivera.ca.us Santa Fe Springs 5 2nd & 4th Thursdays, 6 pm www.santafesprings.org Signal Hill 5 2nd & 4th Tuesdays, 7 pm www.ci.signal-hill.ca.us South Gate 5 2nd & 4th Tuesdays, 6:30 pm www.cityofsouthgate.org Vernon 5 1st & 3rd Wednesdays, 5 pm www.cityofvernon.org Whittier 5 2nd & 4th Tuesdays, 6:30 pm www.cityofwhittier.org
The Long Beach water utility is governed by a Board of Commissioners. The commissioners are appointed to serve by the Mayor, with approval of the City Council. Commissioners are residents of the City of Long Beach and may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. The current board is as follows: Board of Commissioners: Title Length of Term Compensation* Helen Z. Hansen President 06/2006 $100/mtg Stephen T. Conley Vice President 06/2007 $100/mtg Frank Clarke Secretary 06/2008 $100/mtg Lillian Kawasaki Member 06/2009 $100/mtg William Townsend Member 06/2010 $100/mtg * Maximum compensation of $500 per month
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 77
Norwalk has a Water Advisory Ad Hoc Commission that meets on an as-needed basis. The Commission reviews and provides recommendations on water-related issues such as the Capital Improvement Program, conservation measures, rates, complaints and other matters as directed by the City Council. Paramount has a Public Works Commission that meets monthly. The Commission advises the City Council on matters related to public works, including the maintenance and management of the City’s water system.
– SPECIAL DISTRICTS – Central Basin Municipal Water District As an independent special district, the Central Basin MWD is governed by a Board of Directors elected by division. The current Board of Directors has instituted stringent controls to ensure that accountability standards are met. The following summarizes the governance of the Central Basin MWD: Date formed: December 1952 Statutory Authorization: Water Code § 71000 et seq. – Municipal Water District Act of 1911 Board Meetings: 4th Monday of each month, 11:00 a.m. Board of Directors: Title Length of Term Compensation Edward Vasquez Director – Division I 12/2008 $207.22/mtg Robert Apodaca Director – Division II 12/2006 $207.22/mtg George Cole Director – Division III 12/2006 $207.22/mtg Olga Gonzalez Director – Division IV 12/2008 $207.22/mtg Phillip D. Hawkins Director – Division V 12/2008 $207.22/mtg * Directors may be compensated for up to 10 meetings per month.
Meeting notices, agendas and supporting documentation are posted in the lobby of the District’s headquarters and on the District’s website (www.centralbasin.org).
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 78
La Habra Heights County Water District Date formed: November 1976 Statutory Authorization: Water Code § 30000 et seq. – County Water District Act Board Meetings: 3rd Tuesday of each month, 4:30 pm Board of Directors: Title Term Expiration Compensation Bradley Cooke President 12/2005 $100/mtg Michael Roach Vice President 12/2005 $100/mtg Ralph Bolles Director 12/2007 $100/mtg Robert Wilson Director 12/2007 $100/mtg Roy Stewart Director 12/2007 $100/mtg Public notice of meetings is posted at the District’s offices and in the City’s office. The District also produces a newsletter for customers. Orchard Dale Water District Date formed: May 20, 1954 Statutory Authorization: Water Code § 30000 et seq. – County Water District Act Board Meetings: 2nd Wednesday of each month, 7:30 pm Board of Directors: Title Term Expiration Compensation* Cliff Lee President 2007 $165 per mtg. Elden Hughes Vice President 2009 $165 per mtg. Harold Estabrook Director 2009 $165 per mtg. Bob Noonan Director 2009 $165 per mtg. Joe Kennedy Director 2007 $165 per mtg. * Maximum 9 meetings per month
Public notice of meetings is posted at the District’s offices and in the local newspaper. The District does not have a website; however customer communication occurs through newspaper articles, water bills and in the annual Consumer Confidence Report mailed to all residents. Pico Water District Date formed: September 1926 Statutory Authorization: Water Code § 30000 et seq. – County Water District Act Board Meetings: 2nd Wednesday of each month, 7:30 pm Board of Directors: Title Term Expiration Compensation Salvador Orozco President 11/2005 $150/mtg Andy Gonzalez Vice President 11/2005 $150/mtg Anthony Martinez Director 11/2005 $150/mtg Richard Breons (apptd to fill vacant position) Director 11/2005 $150/mtg
Robert Martinez Director 11/2007 $150/mtg * Maximum 10 meetings per month
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 79
Public notice of meetings is posted at the District’s offices, as well as in newspapers. The District also uses pamphlets to communicate information about the District to its customers. Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District Date formed: December 30, 1938 Statutory Authorization: Water Code § 30000 et seq. – County Water District Act Board Meetings: Every other Tuesday, 6:00 pm Board of Directors: Title Term Expiration Compensation Johnny E. Johnson President 12/2005 $150/mtg Ruben Hernandez Vice President 12/2007 $150/mtg Mamie E. Franklin Secretary 12/2007 $150/mtg Elizabeth Hicks Treasurer 12/2007 $150/mtg Anita M. Emery Member 12/2005 $150/mtg Public notice of meetings is posted at the District’s offices, along with meeting agendas. Water Replenishment District of Southern California Date formed: December 9, 1959 Statutory Authorization: Water Code §60000 et seq - Water Replenishment District Act Board Meetings: 1st and 3rd Wednesdays of each month, 1:30 pm Board of Directors: Title Term Expiration Compensation* William H. Murray, Jr. President 01/2007 $215.64/mtg Norm Ryan Treasurer 01/2007 $215.64/mtg Rob Katherman Secretary 01/2009 $215.64/mtg Albert Robles Director 01/2009 $215.64/mtg Patricia Acosta Director 01/2007 $215.64/mtg * Maximum 10 meetings per month
Public notice of meetings is posted at the District’s offices, along with meeting agendas.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 80
4.0 DETERMINATIONS In approving a Municipal Service Review, LAFCO must adopt written determinations for nine factors specified in LAFCO’s governing statutes. Determinations for each agency are provided below:
City of Cerritos DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Cerritos has an estimated population of 51,705 per SCAG 2004
projections and a projected annual growth rate of 0.33%.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Cerritos’ water supply is comprised of groundwater, imported water and recycled water. The City has pumping rights to 4,661 acre-feet of water per year.
The City wholesales water to three other purveyors in the vicinity.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Cerritos accounts for its water utility through an enterprise fund. There was no outstanding debt related to the water utility at June 30, 2002.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Cerritos is avoiding costs for imported water purchases by maximizing the use of groundwater and recycled water.
Cerritos is currently the lead agency of the Southeast Water Coalition, a JPA of cities working to prevent the migration of groundwater contamination from the Whittier Narrows to the Central Basin.
6) Management Efficiencies The City of Cerritos is achieving management efficiencies through its long-range planning and budgeting process. Budget detail for each department includes objectives and workload statistics to track performance over a three year timeframe.
7) Rate Restructuring Cerritos uses a two-tiered rate structure that includes a basic rate for a meter plus 10 billing units of water usage.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Cerritos has an established process for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 81
City of Compton DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Compton’s estimated population is 93,873 per SCAG 2004 projections;
the City is considered built-out. The annual growth rate is expected to be 0.56%, primarily due to infill and redevelopment.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Compton has groundwater pumping rights to 5,723 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin. The City is also a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District and uses treated imported water to meet demand.
Recycled water is not available within the City’s water service area due to the cost to add the infrastructure.
The City noted deficiencies in the water system and identified the need for upgrades or replacements to the water mains, wells, storage facilities, building structures, and a construction yard. This limits the City’s ability to serve growth unless infrastructure improvements are funded by development applicants.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Compton operates its water utility as an enterprise activity.
The City has long term debt associated with water system improvements.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Compton is avoiding costs associated with imported water by leasing additional water rights where cost effective.
The City has 9 emergency interconnections with adjacent water providers.
6) Management Efficiencies Compton uses planning documents including an Urban Water Management Plan, Water Master Plan and Capital Improvement Program as tools to achieve management efficiencies.
7) Rate Restructuring Compton increased water rates effective January 1, 2005. The City has a flat rate structure; water rates in County areas are 1.5 times those of City areas in order to cover the cost of the water mains paid by City residents.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Compton has a process for ensuring that standards of local accountability and governance are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 82
City of Downey DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The City of Downey has an estimated population of 107,821 per SCAG
2004 projections; the projected annual growth rate is 0.52%.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Downey relies on groundwater and recycled water as its source of supply. The City has pumping rights to 16,554 acre-feet annually from the Central Basin. The City leases additional water rights to meet demand.
The City is in the process of constructing deeper, high capacity wells.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The Water Bond indenture that was used to acquire the water system in 1979 was paid off in 2003. The City intends to use a pay-as-you-go approach for future capital improvements.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Downey has informal agreements with adjacent agencies for sharing personnel, equipment, and materials in the event of an emergency.
The City has 5 emergency connections with adjacent water purveyors.
6) Management Efficiencies Downey was awarded the Public Works Director of the Year award by the APWA in 2003.
The Water Utility includes four departments: Supply, Distribution, Customer Service, and Program Support. The City is achieving efficiency through its long range plans and budgeting.
7) Rate Restructuring Downey’s current water rates came into effect in 2000. The City uses a three-tiered rate structure.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Downey has a process for ensuring local accountability and governance.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 83
City of Huntington Park DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The City of Huntington Park has an estimated population of 61,597 per
SCAG 2004 projections and is essentially built-out. The City is projecting an annual growth rate of 0.8% through 2020.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Huntington Park relies on groundwater supplemented with imported water and recycled water for its supply.
The City has groundwater pumping rights for 3,850 acre-feet in the Central Basin and leases additional water rights as needed.
The City’s infrastructure is aging and in need of rehabilitation.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Huntington Park has no long-term debt associated with its water system.
The City has reserves within its Water Fund; however capital projects to address infrastructure deficiencies are limited by available funding.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Huntington Park is avoiding costs associated with imported water through its infrastructure planning for well rehabilitation.
The City shares facilities with South Gate, Metropolitan, the Southern California Water Company, the Central Basin Municipal Water District and Walnut Park Mutual Water Company.
6) Management Efficiencies The City uses objectives in the budgeting process to promote management efficiency.
7) Rate Restructuring The City of Huntington Park uses a flat rate structure. Water rates increase annually per changes in the Consumer Price Index.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Huntington Park has established a process for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 84
City of Lakewood DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Lakewood has a current population of approximately 79,669 per SCAG
2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.34%.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Lakewood relies on groundwater as its primary source of water supply; the City has pumping rights to 9,423 acre-feet per year.
The City provides water service to the portion of the city that lies west of the San Gabriel River.
The City retails recycled water provided by the Central Basin MWD.
The City is in the process of rehabilitating and improving water system infrastructure, such as water main replacements and well improvements.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Lakewood accounts for its water utility through an enterprise fund.
The City uses a five-year planning horizon for its capital improvement budget.
The City has financed water system improvements with loan and revenue bonds.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Lakewood has emergency interconnections with the City of Cerritos, Long Beach Water Department, and Southern California Water Company.
The City is pursuing a joint project with the City of Long Beach to construct an ASR well to allow for additional water supply storage in the Central Basin.
6) Management Efficiencies Lakewood is achieving management efficiencies through its budgeting process, which identifies proposed activities and performance measurements.
7) Rate Restructuring Lakewood uses a flat rate structure; water rates were last increased in November 2001.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Lakewood has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 85
City of Long Beach DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Long Beach has a current population of approximately 463,406, per
SCAG 2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.76%.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Long Beach is a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and purchases imported water directly from Metropolitan.
The City is constructing an extensive recycled water delivery system.
The Water Department’s Capital Improvement Program includes multiple projects. The budgeted cost for improvements for FY 2006 is $12,158,000.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Long Beach finances major infrastructure improvements through low interest loans and other long term debt. The outstanding principal at September 30, 2003 was $6,627,000.
The City uses a five-year planning horizon for its capital improvement budgets.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The Long Beach Water Department is actively seeking ways to maximize water resources through infrastructure improvements and agreements with other agencies.
Long Beach shares facilities with several water agencies including the Water Replenishment District, Central Basin MWD, and Metropolitan Water District.
6) Management Efficiencies The Long Beach Water Department establishes work plans annually to accomplish the goals and objectives set by the Commission. Performance is tracked.
The Long Beach Water Department uses automated telemetry and supervisory control to manage infrastructure components.
7) Rate Restructuring The City uses a four-tiered rate structure, with a rate differential in the first tier for residential customers granted an exemption.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 86
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The Long Beach water utility is governed by a five member Board of Commissioners, appointed by the Mayor to five year terms. The Commission has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 87
City of Lynwood DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The City of Lynwood has a current population of approximately 71,765,
per SCAG 2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.6%, primarily due to infill and redevelopment.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The City of Lynwood relies on groundwater as its primary source of supply, supplemented by imported water. The City has pumping rights in the Central Basin for 5,537 acre-feet annually.
The City is in the process of rehabilitating and improving water system infrastructure, such as water main replacements, pump station upgrades, and well improvements. A new Water System Master Plan is currently being prepared.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Lynwood finances infrastructure improvements through bonds. As of June 30, 2002 the City had $9.7 million in long term debt associated with the water system.
The City accounts for its water and sewer utilities through the Water Fund, an enterprise fund. Funding constraints have limited construction of new facilities and system upgrades.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Lynwood is controlling costs associated with infrastructure improvements by developing a Water System Master Plan.
6) Management Efficiencies Lynwood is achieving management efficiencies through its operations, budgeting, and long range plans.
7) Rate Restructuring Lynwood last increased water rates in 1995. The City has a flat rate structure.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Lynwood has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 88
City of Norwalk DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Norwalk has a current population of approximately 103,716, per SCAG
2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.63%, primarily due to infill and redevelopment.
The City provides water service to approximately 16% of the city.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Norwalk’s water supply is provided through groundwater, imported water and recycled water. The City has pumping rights for 1,267 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin.
The City is in the process of rehabilitating and improving water system infrastructure. A new filtration system is being installed on one well and a new 3.3 million-gallon reservoir is being planned.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Norwalk accounts for its water utility through an enterprise fund.
The City has no long-term debt associated with the water system. The City uses a pay-as-you-go approach for capital projects in the water system.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Norwalk has pursued opportunities to share infrastructure with adjacent private water purveyors, although the private water companies have opted to not proceed with the storage project.
6) Management Efficiencies Norwalk is achieving management efficiencies through its long range planning.
7) Rate Restructuring Norwalk uses a flat rate structure. Prices were increased effective July 15, 2004.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Norwalk has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Norwalk has a Water Advisory Ad Hoc Commission that reviews and provides recommendations on water-related issues such as the Capital Improvement Program, conservation measures, rates, complaints and other matters as directed by the City Council.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 89
City of Paramount DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Paramount has a current population of approximately 55,493 per SCAG
2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.9%, primarily due to redevelopment and infill.
The City provides water service to a majority of the city.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Paramount’s water supply includes groundwater, imported water, and recycled water.
The City has a Capital Improvements Program that addresses water system upgrades and rehabilitation.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Paramount has financed infrastructure improvements through long-term debt. The loan bears an interest rate of 5% and will be repaid in 2017.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Paramount shares facilities with several water agencies including the Water Replenishment District, Central Basin MWD and the Long Beach Water Department.
6) Management Efficiencies Paramount’s Urban Water Management Plan and CIP provide guidance and a framework for the future operations of the utility.
7) Rate Restructuring Paramount has implemented a pricing structure that factors in time of year and increased demand. Water usage rates have two tiers.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Paramount has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
The Public Works Commission advises the City Council on matters related to public works, including the maintenance and management of the City’s water system. Commissioners are appointed by the City Council.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 90
City of Pico Rivera DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The City of Pico Rivera has a population of 63,686 per SCAG 2004
projections. The area is essentially built out, but moderate growth is expected from infill and redevelopment. The projected growth rate is 0.59% annually.
The City provides water service to approximately 70% of the city.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The City of Pico Rivera relies on groundwater as its primary source of supply. Imported water is used to supplement supply.
Pico Rivera has a Capital Improvement Program, which includes upgrades and rehabilitation of the water system.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The City of Pico Rivera formed the Pico Rivera Water Authority through a joint agreement with the City’s Redevelopment Agency in order to finance major improvements to the water system.
The PRWA has long-term debt of approximately $86 million through two issues of revenue bonds and a capital lease.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The Pico Rivera Water Authority shares emergency connections with the City of Whittier and the San Gabriel Valley Water Company. PRWA has its own staff but coordinates with other city departments as needed.
6) Management Efficiencies The Pico Rivera Water Authority is achieving management efficiencies through its planning efforts.
7) Rate Restructuring The City of Pico Rivera increased water rates in October 2003. Billings also include surcharges for power used for pumping, increases to the base rate charged by the Water Replenishment District, and an Equipment and Improvement charge. The Equipment and Improvement charge increases annually based on changes to the CPI.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The PRWA and water utility are addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Pico Rivera has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 91
City of Santa Fe Springs DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Santa Fe Springs has a current population of approximately 17,501, per
SCAG 2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.7%. The City is 85% commercial/industrial with only 15% residential.
The City provides water service to 85% of the city.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Santa Fe Springs’ water supply is provided through groundwater, imported water and recycled water. The City has pumping rights to 4,035 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin, approximately 46% of total current demand.
The City is in the process of replacing two wells; one project is funded.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Santa Fe Springs accounts for its water utility through an enterprise fund. The City has long-term debt for Water Revenue bonds.
The City uses a five-year planning horizon for its Capital Improvement Plan.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Santa Fe Springs shares an emergency connection with the City of Cerritos which is pressure actuated and flows in both directions.
6) Management Efficiencies The City of Santa Fe Springs is using its long-range planning and operations to achieve management efficiencies.
7) Rate Restructuring The City of Santa Fe Springs increased rates effective September 1, 2005. The City has a three-tiered rate structure for potable water and four tiers for recycled water.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Santa Fe Springs has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 92
City of Signal Hill DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Land use within Signal Hill ranges from low-density residential to
industrial. The City has a current population of approximately 9,425, per SCAG 2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 1.5%, primarily due to redevelopment of former oil production properties.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Signal Hill relies on groundwater and imported water for its supply.
The City has completed a feasibility study for recycled water, a water source that is currently not available within the City.
The City has reserves for new system development and infrastructure replacement.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
Signal Hill financed a major water system infrastructure project in 1996. Annual debt amortization is approximately $696,700. The debt will be retired in 2026.
The City has reserves for new water system development, infrastructure replacement and rate stabilization.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
Signal Hill is collaborating with the Central Basin MWD on the City’s recycled water feasibility study.
6) Management Efficiencies Signal Hill has three budgetary departments for its water utility: operations, customer service and debt service. Water Operations and Customer Service have full-time staff assigned.
7) Rate Restructuring Signal Hill has a three-tiered rate structure. Rates were increased 4% in 2004.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Signal Hill has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 93
City of South Gate DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth South Gate has a current population of approximately 96,772 per SCAG
2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 1.06%, primarily due to infill and redevelopment.
The City provides water service to all areas of the city except Hollydale.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
South Gate uses groundwater as its primary source of supply. The City has pumping rights to 11,183 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin.
The City is in the process of rehabilitating and improving water system infrastructure, such as new well and reservoir construction.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
South Gate financed major infrastructure improvements through bonds.
The City uses a 15-year planning horizon for its Capital Improvement Program.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
South Gate has 9 emergency interconnections with other water agencies.
The City is controlling costs associated with capital improvements through the use of the Master Plan and 15-year planning horizon.
6) Management Efficiencies The City of South Gate has a Master Plan for its water system, which allows for efficiencies in water system planning.
7) Rate Restructuring South Gate uses a flat rate structure and pricing is not differentiated between account types.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of South Gate has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 94
City of Vernon DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The City of Vernon is predominantly industrial with less than 100
residents. Growth is expected to be minimal; however water demand for commercial and industrial uses fluctuates based on economic conditions. Overall water demand is projected to increase.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The City of Vernon relies on groundwater for its primary source of supply, supplemented by imported water.
The City maintains its infrastructure and has planned for improvements. The City’s water system has received a Class l rating from the ISO, the highest rating available.
The City has had some contamination issues from perchlorate and DCA1,2; groundwater quality is a concern.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The City of Vernon accounts for its water utility through an enterprise fund. Revenues are adequate for expenses and reserves.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The City of Vernon is controlling costs through the use of a SCADA system to increase efficiency and productivity.
The City participates in the Southeast Water Coalition JPA and the Conjunctive Use Working Group.
6) Management Efficiencies The City of Vernon Water Department has 13 staff. Management efficiencies are achieved through its operational plans and the use of technology.
7) Rate Restructuring The City of Vernon has a flat rate structure; rates were last increased in 2001.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Vernon has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met. The City manages its water system to support the industrial and commercial business base.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 95
City of Whittier DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth Whittier has a current population of approximately 83,997, per SCAG
2004 projections. The projected annual growth rate is 0.42%.
The City provides water service to approximately 50% of the city.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
Whittier’s water supply is provided through groundwater and recycled water. The City has pumping rights to 895 acre-feet per year from the Central Basin and 8,700 acre-feet from the Main San Gabriel Basin.
The City needs to replace three reservoirs that have a capacity of 8 million gallons. Financing and right of way issues are a constraint. However, the City is in the process of constructing one new reservoir, completing water main replacements, and other system upgrades.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The City established the Whittier Utility Authority to provide greater assurance of the fiscal strength of the City’s enterprise funds.
Whittier financed major infrastructure improvements through bonds
The City uses a five-year planning horizon for its capital improvement budget.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The City of Whittier shares emergency connections with the Suburban Water Company, City of Pico Rivera, City of Santa Fe Springs, and San Gabriel Valley Water Company.
The City has an agreement with the Central Basin MWD to share facilities to distribute treated groundwater to other water purveyors.
6) Management Efficiencies Whittier is achieving management efficiency through the goals and objectives established during the annual budget process. Specific work plans are developed by each department to meet the objectives.
7) Rate Restructuring Whittier adjusts water rates annually on July 1st based on the Consumer Price Index.
The City uses a flat rate structure and pricing is not differentiated between account types.
8) Government Structure Options
No government structure options were noted.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 96
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The water utility is addressed during City Council meetings. The City of Whittier has a process established for ensuring that local accountability and governance standards are met.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 97
Central Basin Municipal Water District DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The Central Basin Municipal Water District’s service area is essentially
built-out. Current population is estimated at 1.5 million. The projected annual growth rate is 0.5% which is in keeping with the projected growth rates reported by the retail agencies in the area.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The Central Basin MWD relies on the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California for planning and demand projections for imported water. All imported water is delivered via Metropolitan’s infrastructure; most of the agencies have a connection to the Metropolitan system.
The Central Basin MWD sells recycled water within its service area.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The Central Basin MWD has adopted a Designated Funds policy and has restricted and unrestricted funds to meet the future needs of the District.
The District finances capital improvements through bonds.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The Central Basin MWD is avoiding costs through its participation in groundwater management and conjunctive use programs. The District aggressively pursues alternative water supplies and has developed an extensive recycled water delivery system.
Central Basin shares facilities with a number of agencies, including the West Basin MWD, the City of Long Beach, and the Water Replenishment District.
6) Management Efficiencies The Central Basin MWD is achieving management efficiencies through shared administrative services with West Basin MWD, long-range planning and operational documents.
7) Rate Restructuring Central Basin reviews rates annually and makes adjustments as necessary based on projected costs for imported water and production of recycled water.
8) Government Structure Options
The Central Basin MWD was formed in 1952 under the Municipal Water District Act of 1911 (Water Code §71000 et seq.). No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
Central Basin Municipal Water District maintains a website and provides public notice of meetings.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 98
La Habra Heights County Water District DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The La Habra Heights County Water District serves the City of La
Habra Heights; population is expected to reach 6,635 by 2020.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The La Habra Heights County Water District relies on groundwater for its primary source of supply, supplemented by imported water. The District has adequate capacity to serve its service area.
The District’s water system has received a Class l rating from the ISO, the highest rating available.
The District is implementing the recommendations in the Water Master Plan completed in 2000.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The La Habra Heights County Water District’s primary source of revenue is water sales and charges. The District has reserves to meet future operational and capital needs, as well as debt service. The District has long term debt associated with infrastructure improvements.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The La Habra Heights County Water District shares facilities with the Orchard Dale Water District.
6) Management Efficiencies The La Habra Heights County Water District is achieving management efficiencies through its work order tracking system and the use of long-range plans such as the Water Master Plan and Water Rate Study.
7) Rate Restructuring The La Habra Heights County Water District completed a Water Rate Study in 2001. The District increased rates, but still uses a flat rate structure. There is a rate differential between the upper and lower zones due to energy costs to pump water to the upper zone.
8) Government Structure Options
The La Habra Heights County Water District was formed in 1976 pursuant to the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.) The District’s sphere of influence is coterminous with its boundaries. No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The La Habra Heights County Water District is governed by a Board of Directors elected at large by voters within the District. The District provides public notice of meetings and communicates District activities and accomplishments through newsletters.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 99
Orchard Dale Water District DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The Orchard Dale Water District estimates current population within its
service area to be 20,013 persons. The District has the highest projected growth rate in the Gateway Region at 2.15% annually through 2020.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The Orchard Dale Water District relies on groundwater and imported water. The District’s water allotments and rights are sufficient to cover water demand in normal water years.
The District has developed joint facilities with the La Habra Heights Water District, including wells and pumping facilities. This allows the District to purchase additional water from La Habra Heights in an emergency.
The District budgets for capital improvements annually and maintains and upgrades system infrastructure as needed.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The Orchard Dale Water District’s primary sources of revenue are water sales and service charges.
The District’s long term debt was used to rehabilitate infrastructure shared with the La Habra Heights CWD. The District is responsible for repayment of 30.71% of the loan.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The Orchard Dale Water District is controlling costs by sharing major infrastructure with the La Habra Heights County Water District.
The District participates in the ACWA/JPIA to control risk management costs.
6) Management Efficiencies The Orchard Dale Water District has 7 employees and the General Manager serves under the direction of the Board of Directors.
7) Rate Restructuring The Orchard Dale Water District increased rates in January 2003. The District uses a flat rate structure and pricing is not differentiated between account types.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 100
8) Government Structure Options
The Orchard Dale Water District was formed in 1954 pursuant to the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.) The District’s sphere of influence is coterminous with its boundaries. The majority of the District’s boundaries lie within the sphere of influence of the City of Whittier. No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The Orchard Dale Water District is governed by a Board of Directors elected at large by voters within the District. The District provides public notice of meetings and communicates District activities and accomplishments through newspapers, reports, and billing notices.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 101
Pico Water District DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The Pico Water District encompasses approximately 30% of the City of
Pico Rivera. The area is built out; most future growth is expected to come from redevelopment.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The Pico Water District relies on groundwater as its sole source of supply. The District has exceeded its Allowed Pumping Allocation in each of the past three fiscal years and will require new development to secure additional water rights as a condition of approval.
The District has six operating wells with a combined capacity of 7,493 gallons per minute. Capacity is adequate to meet current demand.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The Pico Water District’s primary sources of revenue are water sales and charges.
The District has long-term debt associated with infrastructure improvements. Debt service will decrease significantly in 2006 as some of the debt is retired.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The Pico Water District participates in the ACWA/JPIA as a means to control liability insurance costs.
6) Management Efficiencies The Pico Water District uses performance evaluations to improve efficiencies.
7) Rate Restructuring The Pico Water District has a three-tiered rate structure. The District also collects a surcharge to cover unfunded State and Federal mandates.
8) Government Structure Options
The Pico Water District was formed in 1926 pursuant to the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.) The District’s sphere of influence is coterminous with its boundaries. The District’s service area lies within the current boundaries of the City of Pico Rivera. No government structure options were noted.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The Pico Water District is governed by a Board of Directors elected at large by voters within the District. The District provides public notice of meetings and communicates District activities through newsletters and pamphlets.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 102
Sativa – Los Angeles County Water District DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District serves a half-square mile
area in the unincorporated Willowbrook area. The area is built-out and the District is not projecting any growth.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District relies on groundwater for its supply. The District has 3 operating wells and one inactive well.
The District needs to relocate water mains to streets and the front of properties to avoid structures being built over existing service lines.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District’s primary source of revenue is water sales and charges and has no long term debt. The District has limited reserves and uses a pay-as-you-go approach for improvements, which may be a constraint for implementing infrastructure improvements.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
No opportunities were noted.
6) Management Efficiencies The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District uses performance evaluations and productivity monitoring to improve efficiencies.
7) Rate Restructuring The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District does not have metered accounts. The District uses a flat rate structure and pricing is not differentiated between account types. Monthly service rates were increased 2.5% on July 1, 2005.
8) Government Structure Options
The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District was formed in 1938 pursuant to the County Water District Act (Water Code §30000 et seq.) The District’s sphere of influence is coterminous with its boundaries. The District’s service area lies within the current sphere of influence of the City of Compton.
Due to the size of its service area, condition of the infrastructure, and financial resources, it is recommended that LAFCO consider adopting a zero sphere of influence for the Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District. There may be efficiencies and economies by reorganizing with another service provider.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 103
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The Sativa-Los Angeles County Water District is governed by a Board of Directors elected at large by voters within the District. The District provides public notice of meetings.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 104
Water Replenishment District of Southern California DETERMINATIONS 1) Population and Growth The Water Replenishment District serves a 420 square mile in southern
Los Angeles County with an estimated population of 3,575,000. Growth will primarily occur through infill and redevelopment.
2) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies
The Water Replenishment District is responsible for groundwater management in the West and Central Groundwater Basins. As such, it provides groundwater recharge programs as well as seawater intrusion barriers and groundwater cleanup.
The District has an extensive Capital Improvements Program that includes ASR wells, pipelines, desalter expansion, spreading grounds, water treatment facilities and rubber dams on the San Gabriel River. The District partners with other agencies on a number of its projects in order to leverage resources.
3) Financing Constraints and Opportunities
The Water Replenishment District uses a five-year planning horizon for its capital improvement budget.
The District uses a pay-as-you-go approach and had no long-term debt as of June 30, 2003.
4, 5) Cost Avoidance Opportunities and Shared Facilities
The Water Replenishment District shares facilities with a number of agencies to protect and enhance the groundwater resources within the region.
The District is controlling costs through its Strategic Plan and 5-year CIP.
6) Management Efficiencies The Water Replenishment District reviews its Strategic Plan annually. The review includes measuring progress made on priority projects and programs.
7) Rate Restructuring The Water Replenishment District reviews its rate annually and makes adjustments based on costs. The District charges a flat per acre-foot rate based on the amount of groundwater extracted.
Los Angeles LAFCO Municipal Service Review Report
Water Service – Gateway Region
November 2005 – Final Report 105
8) Government Structure Options
The Water Replenishment District is considering the possibility of annexing areas of the Central Groundwater Basin that are currently not in the District’s boundary. These are adjacent areas where groundwater resources are not actively managed. This may result in increased groundwater management efficiency, but may also require a new charge for groundwater extracted by agencies within the annexed area and increased retail water costs.
9) Local Accountability and Governance
The Water Replenishment District is governed by a five-member Board of Directors elected at large by voters within the District. The District has a website which provides detailed information on District projects and achievements.