The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Utilities Committee 2007-06-21AGENDA TOWN OF ESTES PARK UTILITIES COMMITTEE 8:00 a.m. Thursday, June 21, 2007 , Preparation date: June 15, 2007 *Revised: June 20,2007 ACTION ITEMS PUBLIC COMMENT Light and Power Department 1. Phone System Replacement *a. Request approval to award AXESS Communications the contract for support/maintenance at the cost of $1500.00 monthly and purchase/ installation of the Avaya IP 500 Office phone system for $95,000.00. 1. Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan Statistical Update RFP: response summary a. Request to accept proposal and negotiate contract for services Water Department No Action Items REPORTS: Light and Power 1. Light and Power Financial Reports Water 1. Water Financial Reports Note: The Utilities Committee reserves the right to consider other items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. hp Laserjet 3015 -/.-' # M. V~~MVMW~-/ HP LASERJET FAX invent Jun-20-2007 4:37PM Fax Call Report Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 348 6/20/2007 4:33:46PM Send 5869561 0:34 1 OK 349 6/20/2007 4:34:25PM Send 5869532 0:33 1 OK 350 6/20/2007 4:35:03PM Send 5861691 0:37 1 OK 351 6/20/2007 4:35:46PM Send 6353677 0:00 0 No Answer 352 6/20/2007 4:36:52PM Send 5771590 0:40 1 OK .. MEMO TO: Utilities Committee Town Administrator Repola From: Mark Pallissard, IT/LAN Manager Bruce Walters, IT/LAN Support Specialist Date: June 21, 2007 Subject: Phone System Replacement Background The present phone system was purchased in 1992 from Executone and was scheduled for replacement in the 2009 budget year. In December of 2006 staff was contacted by the current maintenance vendor, BlackBox, and informed that BlackBox would only support the current phone system for another six months. This necessitated finding a phone system to replace the ex\sung one. For details on the RFP process, see page 2. Budget Cost of the new phone system will be paid for out of 502-7001-580.33-36 and 502-7001-580.33- 33 Capital Accounts in Light and Power. The maintenance and phone line charges will be absorbed by budgets established for each department's telephone expense xxx-xxxx-xxx-28-01. The total cost for the new Avaya IP 500 Office phone system as bid by AXESS Communications will be: Hardware and equipment costs $95,000.00 Maintenance costs $1500.00/mnth Recommendations Staff recommends awarding AXESS Communications the contract for support / maintenance at the cost of $1500.00 monthly and purchase / installation of the Avaya IP 500 Office phone system for $95,000.00. The purchase costs will be reallocated per department during the next budget cycle. .. Background continued from page 1 REQUIREMENTS: Requirements for the new system included: â€¢ Current technology â€¢ Scalability â€¢ Longevity â€¢ Redundancy â€¢ Affordability (within Town's budget) â€¢ The new system would have to support the current goal of eliminating as many additional lines as possible to reduce phone costs RFP PFROCESS: The process of vendor and system selection began in February of 2007. The RFP was sent to nine prospective vendors. This vendor list included Ted Tonus, owner of Cottonwood Communications, who designed the current phone system. The initial proposals were reviewed by the IT department and the Technical Committee. Vendor proposals were made to the Technical Committee and others who would be impacted by the new system. AXESS Communications was selected as the winning bidder. AXESS PROPOSAL: AXESS Communications' proposal for replacement includes: â€¢ Avaya I P 500 Office phone system â€¢ Axess Communications Platinum Service REFERENCES: AXESS was required to provide at least five customer references, and all of these references were very positive. Each of the five companies providing input worked with different AXESS maintenance teams, and all were very pleased with the level of service provided by their AXESS service providers. Community Development Memo TO: Utilities Committee From: Bob Joseph CC: Randy Repola Date: 6-19-07 Re: Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan Statistical Update RFP Response Summary BACKGROUND: The Town issued a request for proposals last month for a two-part statistical update of the Comprehensive Plan: Economic review and Land Use build out. The request was published in the Trail and was posted on the Colorado APA website. We received six responses which are summarized as follows: DSW/Foresee $34,909 to $43,909 Fronczyk $3,850 Land Elements $52,113 RA Smith $28,000 to $50,000 Sammons/Dutton/HNTB $22,000 Stamey/FHU $17,450 It is staff's recommendation that the best combination of qualifications and price is the Stamey/FHU proposal. BUDGET: $20,000 ( 101.1100-411.22.98 Legislative Account) ACTION: Accept the Stamey/FHU proposal and authorize staff to negotiate a contract for services. 1 Request For Proposals: Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan Statistical Update The Town of Estes Park is requesting proposals for a statistical update of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan. The scope of this work is the update of all out-of-date statistics contained in Chapter Three: Economic Overview and Appendix One: Economic Profiles. The work will also entail a new build-out land use and population projection that is based on the underlying potential of the current zoning as constrained by the provisions of the Estes Valley Development Code. This build-out analysis should be performed in a GIS format that can be delivered to the Town for ongoing in-house maintenance (e.g. Community Viz or similar ArcMap based approach). The proposals should provide separate cost and time frame estimates for each of the three elements of the update: Chapter Three, Appendix One, and the Build-out Analysis. Deliverables shall include the integration of this work into the original comp plan document in the form of an addendum to the respective chapters to be provided in a digital format that matches the original document. The existing Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan document can be viewed and downloaded at www.estesnet.com/comdeWComprehensivePIan.aspx This work will entail meetings with the Town's project manager as needed to provide direction, but the work will not entail any public meetings, outreach or visioning process. The Town will provide all existing land use and zoning information at a parcel specific level in a digital shape file format (ArcMap). The Town will also provide all other relevant statistics that are generated and maintained by the Town. Acquisition of relevant statistics generated and held by third parties (e.g. current Census and DOLA info) will be the responsibility of the consultant. Contact Community Development Director: Bob Joseph at 970-577-3725 (bioseph@estes.org). Proposals are due the first week of June, 2007 (Town of Estes Park, Community Development, PO Box 1200, 170 MacGregor Ave, Estes Park, Colorado 80517. The Town will consider acceptance of separate proposals for each of the three elements, or alternatively, may accept a single-source proposal for all elements. The Town reserves the option to proceed with only one or two of the three elements based on funding constraints. â€¢ Page 2 Stamey and Associates 8151 Anchor Drive Longmont, CO 80504 303-532-9510 Mr. Bob Joseph Community Development Director Town of Estes Park P.O. 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Sent via email: bioseph@estes.org RE: Proposal for Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan Statistical Update Dear Mr. Joseph: Stamey & Associates and Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) are pleased to submit a joint proposal for preparation of the statistical update of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stamey will serve as project manager, and coordinate preparation of the work product. Stamey & Associates will prepare the updates to Chapter Three and Appendix One. FHU will prepare the Build-out Analysis, and associated updates to the Land Use map and table in Chapter 4. The team has considerable working knowledge of the Estes Valley, and is looking forward to working with Town staff on the Comprehensive Plan Update. Please advise me if you have any questions or need additional information. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Stephen L. Stamey, AICP President Stamey & Associates ENC: Proposal CC: Evan Kirby, Senior Environmental Scientist, FHU Tyler Stamey, Associate STAMEY PROPOSAL COVER . . I. PROPOSAL FOR ESTES VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATISTICAL UPDATE SUBMITTED BY STAMEY & ASSOCIATES & FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG JUNE 1, 2007 STAMEY PROPORAI PAnc . . PROPOSAL Stamey & Associates is submitting a Proposal for Professional Services for the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan Statistical Update, in response to the Town of Estes Park's Request for Proposals. Stamey & Associates has teamed with Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) to prepare the Build-Out Analysis in a GIS format deliverable to the Town. SCOPE OF WORK The following updates will be performed by Stamey & Associates. Chapter Three: Economic Overview Stamey & Associates will update the statistical information in Chapter Three: Economic Overview, pages one through 13, using the data sources cited in Chapter 3, and using the assumptions of the Plan. The Trend Projections Through 2000 will be updated to reflect housing and population trends through the 2000's. The base Town data on pages 11 and 12 will be updated. Stamey & Associates understands that the Scope does not include updates to Potential Economic Development Strategies. Sections that are no longer applicable will be edited and/or deleted, based on direction of the Town' s project manager. Chapter 3 update will be prepared in the format that matches the original Comprehensive Plan. Appendix One: Economic Profiles Stamey & Associates will update the statistical tables in Appendix One, using the cited data sources. The Town will provide data and statistics that are maintained by the Town, for update of applicable tables. The statistical tables will be updated in the format that matches the original Comprehensive Plan. Build-out Analysis Stamey & Associates understands the Estes Valley Development Code, and the density regulations that must be used to calculate a build-out density. Stamey & Associates has teamed with FHU to prepare the build-out analysis in a GIS format, deliverable to the Town, in a format that that can be used by the Town for on-going in-house maintenance. The FHU proposal for the GIS build-out component is included as part of this proposal. EXPERIENCE AND PERSONNEL Stamey & Associates was formed in November 2005, to provide professional planning and development review services to municipal clients. Stamey & Associates has a history of providing "turn-key" projects to municipal clients. Steve Stamev, President Mr. Stamey has over twenty years professional planning experience in Colorado, serving as planning/community development director for the Town of Estes Park, Town of Erie, and City of Steamboat Springs. As President of Stamey & Associates, Steve leads all projects and is responsible for project initiation, client interaction, project preparation, STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 2 and final completion. Steve has extensive experience in land use regulation, permitting, development reviews, and preparation of comprehensive plans and related planning reports. Steve has presented programs on community planning, resort development and land use regulations at a number of conferences, including National APA, Colorado APA, and Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute. Mr. Stamey is a Charter Member of the American Institute of Certified Planners, #3790. Mr. Stamey will attend all meetings with the Town Project Manager and the Stamey/FHU team, and will coordinate the build-out analysis performed by FHU, and provide input into build-out assumptions. Tyler Stamev, Civil Engineer and Associate Tyler Stamey is a graduate of the Colorado School of Mines, and has over three years of professional engineering experience with FHU and Black and Veatch. While at FHU, Mr. Stamey was involved in projects such as the Denver Strategic Transportation Plan, the Larimer County Transportation Plan, and the CDOT Statewide Transportation Plans. These projects involved management of large databases and application of demographic and land use data. Mr. Stamey will coordinate the data collection and preparation of statistical tables for Appendix One. PROJECT BUDGET The project budget for the Estes Park Comprehensive Plan Statistical Update: Updates to Chapter Three and Appendix One: $ 6,010.00 GIS Build-out Analysis: $10,120.00 Chapter 4 Land Use Map and Land Use Table: $ 1,320.00 TOTAL: $17,450.00 NOTE: Stamey & Associates has included project management time for the GIS element (quality control, project coordination and build-out assumptions) in the Chapter Three -i- and Appendix One budget. Detailed budget information from Stamey & Associates and FHU for each component of the proposal is set forth below. PROJECT TIME FRAME Stamey & Associates and FHU will start the project within one week of acceptance of a Contract for Services. An initial draft of each component will be provided to the Town for review and comment within 45 days. After receipt of comments from the Town, the final project will be submitted to the Town within 45 days. STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 3 Estimated Chapter 3 and Appendix One Updates Hours & Budget Stamey Stamey Totals Project Task President Civil Engineer $1 10/Hour $80/Hour Hours Fees 1. Prctiect initiation. Meeting with Town Project Manager and team. Development ofbuild out 10 -0- 10 $1,100 assumptions and Development Code constraints. 2. Collection of data from Town, for applicable updates to Chapter 3 and Appendix One. 5 -0- 5 $550 3. QC and collection of data for Appendix One, preparation of 3 20 23 $ 1,930 updated Statistical Tables, 4. Project updates and coordination with Town Project Manager and 4 -0- 4 $440 FHU. 5. Update and format Chapter 3. 8 2 10 $1,040 6. Review FHU Map products and build-out analysis. Submission to 5 -0- 5 $550 Town. 7. Other direct costs: mileage, NA NA NA $400 copies, reproduction TOTALS 35 22 57 $6,010 STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 4 EXPERIENCE AND PERSONNEL FHU is a Colorado based firm in business for 22 years with extensive planning experience. FHU's GIS staff has provided services for municipalities, cotinties, and planning regions throughout the state. These assignments have equipped our GIS staff of experienced professionals with the necessary tools to complete the objectives of this project. The following are brief descriptions of the key staff members who will be responsible for completing this study. Evan Kirby, GIS Manager / Senior Environmental Scientist Mr. Kirby has 12 years of professional experience in' GIS application and development. Mr. Kirby will administer the GIS portion of the project, overseeing and reviewing the GIS outputs associated with each task. He has managed GIS analyses on a wide array of multi-disciplinary CDOT projects, includiAg the I-70 Mountain Corridor PEIS and the Berthoud Pass EA for CDOT Region 1, the SH402 EA, the US34 EA, and the US287 - SH1 to the Laporte Bypass EA for CDOT Region 4 while with J.F. Sato & Associates. His current project work includes the N I-25 EIS and the CDOT Statewide Travel Map Update & Conversion. In addition to his knowledge of the ESRI Personal Geodatabase format, Mr. Kirby has used Arc/Info since version 6.0 and is highly knowledgeable of the Arc/Info coverage and grid formats. Mr. Kirby' s interdisciplinary background in both the public and private sectors provides him with a wide range of GIS expertise that will aid in the efficient completion of this project. Keith Hidalgo, GIS Analyst / Environmental Scientist I Mr. Hidalgo has 5 years of professional GIS experience on the ESRI software platform. Mr. Hidalgo will conduct the basic tasks for the project under Mr. Kirby's supervision, completing the initial work for the overall project and the QA/QC of the outputs associated with each task. He has performed GIS tasks on a wide array of CDOT projects, including the Valley Highway EIS and the I-225/Colfax EA. In addition to his knowledge of the personal geodatabase format, Mr. Hidalgo has worked with Arc/Info since version 7.0 including GIS work on the UNIX platform. Mr. Hidalgo's GIS expertise includes work in both the public and private sectors. Mr. Hidalgo's current GIS efforts include the Upper Front Range and Eastern Transportation Planning Regions Plans as a part of the CDOT Statewide Transportation Plan, I-70 / 32nd Avenue EA, the Northwest Corridor EIS for CDOT Region 6, and the CDOT Statewide Travel Map Update & Conversion. Together, this team provides the benefits of experienced GIS staffing and financial efficiency in support of the planning effort for the project. STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 5 APPROACH The GIS component of the project will generate build-out housing numbers for the Estes Valley Planning Area that will be used to update information contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The following provides an outline of the GIS approach for conducting the constraint analysis overlay mapping: 1. Data Inputs - City planning area layers containing physical constraint data will be compiled, including steep slopes, water table, and floodplain information. Zoning, land use and housing unit information will be utilized in conjunction with the constraint mapping in order to produce layers of anticipated build-out housing density. Exhibit 1 includes an example of the overlay concept: Exhibit 1 - Example Geospatial Model in ArcCatalog Overlay of Land Use & Zoning *19> 5 , ?i~ Overlay of Slope **417 Constraints 1 Overlay of Hydrologic r Constraints Geospatial Model / i Y w.: e Â· TU?%'. :. % : and Constraint ' Discounting I.h r,-14 -3-17 0 Shc~er:bil/1/12#t ' 11 . Â· " - ~'41*44*1â€¢:r 1 , S'iMAA 7--:t- 4CC.1.-2-97.....>C..,11\2Ji;- Final Combined Constraints Layer 192623 STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 6 2. Planning Consultation - Discounting formulas will be developed for constraint areas based upon consultation with the Town planning staff. Areas falling within multiple constraint areas will be discounted for build-out density through an iterative overlay process. Constraint features will include slope, floodplains, etc. 3. Geospatial Model - This information will be inserted into a geospatial model within ArcCatalog in ArcGIS 9.2. Use of a geospatial data model will allow the Town to update the statistics generated from the analysis in perpetuity as the physical constraints, zoning, or land use data change. The model is also useful in documenting the specifics of the overlay process used, making future updates simple and easy to understand. Export of tables for use in Chapter 3, Chapter 4 Land Use, and Appendix 1 will be automated in the geospatial model. New ModelBuilder features in ArcGIS 9.2 include an in-memory workspace, improving the performance of the model. Exhibit 2 below is an example of a geospatial model developed for impact analysis on a major CDOT EIS project: Exhibit 2 - Example Geospatial Model in ArcCatalog Northwest r=aÂ»-5 Corridor EIS Alternative ___ --~ Overlay Model -=â€ž.*Â® ~22'e #H.. ./17:754.-4.FA<,1/ -- See~ ....< -8- 1:*1304*3-4* -323Â® ./XEQI:7211"h,MH/",GE*"m' 0/2=8 42*-*54â‚¬- ,/" ..1 .VITI/ Ig- - -6.- Legend .e=me-=Mle,"Ill OCSSIN,41..2.._ ..somâ€¢1-1,2.< --- occ. CON...__â€ž_.... .im.**as-0-li-*eBID 4. Quality Control - A comprehensive QC process will be performed, including visual inspection of spatial and attribute data for each feature class, following the order of conversion from the conversion model. The toolbox containing the conversion model would be provided to Estes Park planning staff. STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 7 5. Metadata & Documentation - Metadata for the final data layers would be developed using the Town' s metadata template or other approved format, documenting the spatial overlay process and the currency of the data used. The geospatial model will also serve to document the process. 6. Maps - Maps for use in Chapter 3, Chapter 4, and Appendix 1 would be developed as needed; two maps are currently anticipated for project; one displaying the constraint features, the other showing the final overlay build-out housing density results. ESTIMATED MAN-HOURS AND BUDGET Exhibit 3 summarizes the estimated man-hours by labor category for each task. It also provides an estimated cost of the GIS portion of the project. Exhibit 3 - Estimated GIS Hours & Budget Kirby Hidalgo Totals Project Task GIS Manager GIS Analyst $130/Hour $80/Hour Hours Fees 1. Develop catalog of layers and constraint features 4 4 8 $840 2. Develop constraint mapping discounting formulas and consult with Town planning staff 16 16 32 $3,360 (Includes 2 meetings) 3. Design conversion model in Arceatalog ModelBuilder 16 32 48 $4,640 4. QC of model results 4 8 12 $1,160 5. Develop and edit metadata 0 10 10 $800 6. Create ArcMap MXDs for two maps 0 8 8 $640 TOTALS 40 78 118 $11,440 STAMEY PROPOSAL PAGE 8 Finance, Light & Power, Water Departments Memo To: Utility Committee Town Administrator Repola From: Steve MeFarland, Finance Officer Date: June 21, 2007 Subject: Utility committee report Background Attached the following documents for the Committee's perusal: â€¢ Charts and graphs for May 2007 â€¢ Financial statements for May 2007. Body Light & Power The cash flow comparison page (right column) shows that revenues (44%) are exceeding the pace of the calendar (42%), and expenses in every category are at or under the calendar pace. Revenues per kWh are up compared to 2006. Expenses are slightly elevated as well ($175,000). 43% of this total is an increase in source of supply. Admin costs are approximately $89,000 higher than 2006 primarily due to exhibit display costs ($36,000), communication costs ($5,000), data processing ($5,000), and PILOT/franchise-related items ($14,000). For both Light & Power and Water, "cash received/allocated to other sources" is unusually high this month, due to adjusting entries from the 2006 CAFR. These should return to normal next month. This line item always involves movement in the balance sheet that is not recorded as part of monthly revenue/expense cash flow. After an "off' month, the green/red chart seems to be returning to green, meaning that generally revenues are trending upwards. This is also reflected in the "L&P Revenue Progress" chart (note the red bar increase from April). The new charts also reflect progress. The "Actual L&P revenues over/beyond budget" chart shows that compared to budget (ratio of actual to budget), we are almost exactly where last year at this time. This is portrayed in bar chart form on the next chart. Water The water cash flow comparison page continues to report outstanding numbers. Unfortunately, we continue to show the erroneous 2006 tap fee amount in YTD, which inflates 2006 $345,000 beyond what it should be. This entry was not corrected until last July, so we will have to continue to deal with it for a few more months - I will continue to note it. Otherwise, the water financials continue to look terrific. Revenues are slightly ahead of calendar pace (43% vs 42%), while expenses are quite low (31%). Customer billing and accounts is negative vs budget ($55,000) primarily due to meter purchases ($43,000). The charts and graphs continue to trend well. As you can see in the new graph, the water revenues for 2007 are outpacing 2006. Revenues really took off in June last year, so it will be interesting to see if that happens again in 2007. Conclusion Both utilities look very strong financially. Action steps requested - None. â€¢Page 2 O 4 MONTHLY PEAK DEMAND 25500 23500 21500 - - -0- 2005 -I,-2006 19500 - - --<>- 2007 17500 15500 - 13500 + 11500 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec MONTHLY ENERGY PURCHASES 14,000 - f 12,000 - -Â·~ 0% %4- 73 93 7% A z 10,000 -4 -~ Â¥ 7 - E- 37 44 7}92% - 4 04 33 111% 'It 5% %1 82005 F# 3.4 ; 5% 4, 01 0. 1 2.51 + 3% ~f--44 *3 %2 %4 1 02006 ~ 8,000 -04 -0* -9* -34 -%3 09 2% * 03 Me 3% %* 1 O 2007 6,000 - ' -24 4 : -#4 -0 09 *A Mt *3 &* 0% 0 0-1 43 6% iq 31 04 41 04 0% 2% 04 1 lili 49 3/4 0* 3% 0% 4,000 -+45 -$4 - 4* %3 04 4.8 4 4 04 4% 0% 32 %% 3.35 0,2 0 4 #f 00 4 3% $ * 4 5 * I â‚¬ 2 1 1% 1Â« 1% m 4 1 4 34 1 4582 0% M 5% A 0 2,000 - #12 32 ' U ' , ./ b ' Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R L&P 6 SYSTEM KW Ma \*N444*Â»H \94* -H-HIPY:p:*% m *t444*1*UN*444 .. YTD ENERGY PURCHASES 140,000 120,000 - 100,000 -- 2,86% YTD 2007 VS 2006 1- __ @ --~ - II 2005 80,000 1 r 102006 60,000 ~- ~ -2 - 4 -4 - 0 -|i - I 1 2007 i 200000000 %"$$"-Il-lili 1 --1--1 4-1 4 ~ 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD POWER COST vs. BUDGET ($1,000) 8 BUDGET Â¤ACTUAL 5,000 4,500 4,000 Eli 3,500 3,000 E#Â§4%2 M - UM- 2,500 2 i 2,000 1,500 0.- 2 -fi h 1,000 ------~ --9 - 1--2-1 -- 4 - A 1imR â‚¬ 4 1- 500 -erl~~ , M &3"1&- Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R L&P 7 L-==== YTD MWH Purchased my*7* . 4 ELECTRIC SALES BY MONTH ($1,000) 1,200 1,100 1,000 -= -- 900 -=- -* O 2005 800 -- -- g -1- M 2006 700 -Â·-~ --.~ O 2007 7- 1-32 41 600 - - -1 m~ _ FEi -i-1~ i{+Ilt- 1 500 - - 400 - 300 - .8. 1 1 mi Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YEAR TO DATE ELECTRIC SALES ($1,000) 12,000 4.05% 2007 YTD VS 10,303,317 2006 10,000 - 0 2005 . 1 - 8,000 - -4 -1 r. 1 I 2006 , . 1 ,Â·AL ' 11 21 ' 1 -1 ./.-1 . 1.1 Â·21 6,000 - 02007 - 11 1 11 1 1 1 .1 - Budget 4,000 T-1-1 m 2,000 1 /. r-1911 11 1 'll 1 1 m W Jit '1;_, 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R L&P 8 YEAR TO DATE SALES MONTHLY SALES .. 2 2 0 222&:ES 2222 =n= W = 5; * z m DEVA OCA 0 E- 1- I. le,Or-1 R 8Â§9 Â¢918=82 000 odd 000 E/% Â§*3 odd 0000 2 01 210 f er; re 0- 0. â„¢& Â¤S R, 60 38 NE B e,5 E & S: 0 5 2 0 2:& 00 0 0 62 %% atgoeÂ° O i Oq t-1 S; Tr Z 0 00 0 Cl " 00 8 2 b 80 0 8 -S 6 . i 64 43 O%09 & 1 3 .5 1. lizu m ~- tu 0 U ning unrestricted (usable) fund balance 4,063,286 3,195,309 $3,195,309 $3,195,309 100% NTH-TO-DATE MONTH TO DATE YEAR TO DATE BUDGET vs. YTD OL*'05 046' 00 E 100*0 100 0 089'f OL*'06 051'55 Source of Supply 311,450 628,440 (316,990) 1,914,797 1,990,478 (75,681) 0.041 0.04 4,785,000 1,990,478 Distribution and Maintenance 106,455 115 44 (8,789) 5 586,811 (12,760) 0.012 0.01 1,595,754 586,811 mer Billing and Accounts 2,309 584) ~ , 52,598 .005 0.0 678,784 252,598 Ad ninistration and General 1,726,47 515,031 Total O&M Expenses 542,19 866,34 (324,145) 3,169,536 3,344,918 (175,382) 8,786,01 3,344,918 689'EE1 LE!'8ZE' I Â£000 800'0 566'5Â£Z 689'EEI t89'69Â£ (589'9Â£) 661'85 fig'Ir SBE'â‚¬It Z99'fL6 600'0 800'0 (Zeâ‚¬'LE) 88Z'Elf 906'SLE (6Zf'9) ILI'EL Z*L'99 ino SJOJsue.11 Bu! lelodo 59Â£'86'Â£ ZfL'68Â£'II 5800 900 I 16'LE 59Â£'3*6'E 9LZ'0Â£6'Â£ (69Z'L9Â£) till'966 *54'639 samlipuodxa Imol 894'MM (051'.9) SRE'BLI 89f'fSL Â£81'909 (6t6' lEE) (168'ILI) 890'09I ([Budeo @10Joq soin,!puedxo 8Â£9'699 V/N 8Â£9'699 8Â£9'699 0 020'85L 020'EL 0 SOOmOS 10410 01 P01800119/p@A!0001 4SBO 901't*' 1 (051'â€ž,9) EZ6'Lt8 90 I '*54' I Â£81'909 I LO'9Et 62:/'985 850'091 41UOUI JOJ uo! 1!sod qseo u! ovuell o 5 1 f'6*9't,$ 651'199'2$ 5 I *'6+9'ti 51+'6*9'M 001!Eleq pung (piqesn) pmoulsolun SU!Pu3 Utility Sales 730,466 801,898 71,432 4,592,092 9 10,208,573 4,59 59,046 22,924 (36.122) 537,019 1 VAR VAR Per kWh Per kWh Budg 2006 20 2006 2007 ofBu 789,512 824,822 35,310 4,5 10,745,592 4,7 8 3 T AND POWER FUND 1@Ao sonuOAO,jO Kou@!01@p/SSOOXED [moiqns LOW COMPARISON Operation and Maintenance Expense .2006 Revenues ' TOWN OF ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER TRENDS Type Surnmary Date May-07 12 - month moving average Total % Total % of Avg Avg Avg # of accts KWH Growth Revenues Total Rev % Cum Rev/KWH KWH/Cust Rev/Cust Residential 7.466 3,955.008 0.8% $363,025 43% 43% $0.0919 529 $48.60 Gen Serv Small 1.610 2,088.673 0.5% $188,336 22% 65% $0.0903 1,298 $117.07 Gen Serv Large 93 2,805,200 0.0% $172,699 20% 86% $0.0617 30,300 $1,865.54 Residential Demand 389 710,290 1.0% $64,639 8% 93% $0.0958 1,838 $166.97 Res Energy / Time of Day 242 406.345 1.4% $25.736 3% 96% $0.0649 1.669 $105.76 Municipal 60 248,709 0.1% $ 19.493 2% 99% SO.0785 4,165 $326.48 RMNP - Small Admin 21 65, I 54 2.1% $2.993 0% 99% SO.0460 3.139 $144.21 RMNP - Large Admin 6 62,282 -0.1% $2.695 0% 99% $0.0435 10,380 $449.21 Wind Power 103 0 0.0% $1,940 0% 99% N/A N/A N/A Res Basic Energy 19 24.198 1.3% $2,103 0% 100% $0.0875 1.29() $11 l.97 GSS -Comml-Energy TOD 13 17.671 0.5% $1.216 0% 100% $0.0694 1,359 $93.54 GSL - Comml - Time of Day 1 10.880 0.6% $751 0% 100% $0.0706 0 $0.00 Outdoor Area Lighting 16 0 0.0% $229 0% 100% N/A N/A N/A Res Time of Day 0 0 #DIV/0! $0 0% 100% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! RMNP - Administrative 2 579 17.1% $32 0% 100% N/A N/A N/A 10.040 avg $845,888 100% annual revenues at this pace: $10,150,660 budget: $10,208,573 projected over/under: | ($57,913)| I . . Â¢O '~ 81 -*.-i.â€¢ . 1 1.. <b 11& <b 9. 4 <22 46) L&P Revenue Progress $10,100,000 - - m Budgeted Revenues lueJJno te senueAeH . - - 000'006'658 06 Â¢09 + $10,500,000 000'0017'0 Lit $10,300,000 $10,200,000 -- -P - - $10,000,000 - -- - - 000'008'6$ $9,600,000 - ~- - - - 000'002'6$ - 000'009'6$ . . 2 Z 9001 - ZOOZ - des nv Inf unr XeW Je qed uer Actual L&P revenues over/beyond Budget 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% %00 0 %00- L- %00-Z- 9000 â‚¬- 1. . ' 9"-49Â·... . 0 . . a :?%Â£97-1 - >Au-*' i '- . .. .. 00 000 0 00 0,0 0 00 00, 0 00 0,0 0 0,0 0,0 I .00 00, 0,0 00: .1 0,0 00 0 I .00 0,0 0,0 00. .1 6/12/2007 Water Sales by Month ($) 350,000 300,000 250,000 F j --9 ,1 'I 200,000 ' Â¤2005 3 :- : : 5 02006 150,000 -- Â¤2007 M & 4 4 015 @ 100,000 - Q - Q - N N - j - ~- - j j- ~-- 3 -- ~- / V. ,tt 0 -8 35_ Vt J. 7 . 3, _f, v Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Water Sales Year-To-Date ($1,000) 3,000 $2,816,89~ 2,500 92005 2,000 ~ 2006 _r~ -- - 92007 4% 1,500 -Budget 26 5 - 3 3.73% 2007 YTD VS 2006 500 allf 7 -- g-- 1,000 / 1 ,1 5 5 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 1 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec RW5 L\\\\\Â»Â»NÂ«Â©Â©69 \\\\\\\\\\\/7 nlillillillilix/'llÂ»X\Â»Â»Â»XiÂ« .. .. 22 2 0 2 y 6% 4 5"~'11,Â·r, V-1 Â¢-1.t-Â©1- 0 Z ~0 Â°3 N 61 1 0 M A 288@E Â§@Â§Â§Â§*5 Â©dedÂ© doodded -01%-0100 00 888888E 6060006 - 0 2 5 m - M - 8% E %4% mr eNC.--000~ 0-0000, M 00\.1â€¢n~O r, & 2292% H er; M Ls = FC,Fr~irc .1 .1 e 00 01 - r, 00 eN DO * 00 - O 0 0 %53% M rn 1- M 0 00 F 0 - * rn - 0 00 r~ ed ed c: gl~hg â‚¬*EUE E M 000010,10, 0 C .., ig -0 7 M 5 2 > - DE f 61 fr. h '., rr d d Q d -DO - M râ€¢5 - *% Aâ‚¬n 0-Egne 0 0 .1 NN N, M. - 00 00 St R 0% 9 1 Al 4 0 2%*0 0 A eN iNg i- f < 6/ I O-er, ., 1g.gE U . il M :83 0%@256464 A 22 A fox -13 VAR Per Gal Per Gal Budget YTD % Beginning unrestricted (usable) fund balance 3.552,704 , $3.297.192 $3,297.192 100% 55,999 45,68 541,648 193,919 36% %EE I BZ' SLE 95L'It'8 00UUUMUIEIN pill? %Et' 109'9Â£1 610'BIE (Â£Â£61'9) %ZE 180'001 000'0 000'0 CLEO'Z 489' 1 Â£ L+9'6Z ( ) 89Â£9 ino s.10)sunli Bulle.odo %9E 968'506 Â£6Â£'BES' E 010 0 180 968'506 880'016 (XEE'ff) 8L0'061 0+8'9*1 Sam:!puodÂ¥3 18101 NTH-TO-DATE MONTH TO DATE YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE 2006 2007 2007 ~ ~~ of Bu~ Plant Development Tap Fees 53.819 18,816 (35.003) ( 136.840) 0.003 00,000 86,828 ter rights Tap Fees 89,160 (33.937) (269.610) 0.006 ~000 243,040 335,839 252,2 (339,60!) 0. 19 2,943,~~ 1,259,70~ 146,531 75,962 52% 969'6Â£1 9*E'08L 81['LE uo[) pile uoliatisil %1Â£ 65Â£'IES Â£05'IZ I 11 /1) Â§Lg'Â£81 8517'OLI osuadxf[ 0]Ueuoilliepr pue uoileuodo In %6 .TE 0 1 4'90[ 000 0 0 Â£85'5 90Â£ 8 0/AJOS Jqoa Â° 849'*E EOL'Â£6* 000-0 000 0 (198'0 ) Rt9'tâ‚¬ LWL'E (986'0Â£) 181!dEO Water sales 167.718 168,912 1, 94 790,272 29.479 0.009 45,572 819,751 SIE't6 V/N (9106) SIZ't,6 0 (9Â£170Â£1) 9LE'OEI 0 s jamos 104,0 01 POBJOCIE/p@A!000.1 4SEO 6 IE' S+L' ES LIO'ZIL'Z$ 6IZ'StÂ£'Â£$ 6IZ'5*L'Â£$ jougluq purg (01qesn) poioulsolun 2u!pul ZIS'[dE (9*1 99) Â£0 218Â£9Â£ IZE'689 {098121> 6Â£1'Z9 666'681 (imideo ojojoq s ~io~ns LEO'Stt (911 989) (*61'1*E) LEO 8ft' IZZ'689 919'Z 915'/61 666'681 tliuouj ioJ uoii,sod qseo ui 98uetID 25,142 ( 37,370 0. 01 CASH FLOW COMPARISON JOAO SOnUOAOJ Jo KJUM]19095&03 ATER FUND 07 vs. 2006 Revenues 1, .. I .. TOWN OF ESTES PARK WATER DEPARTMENT TRENDS Type Summary Date May-07 12 - month moving average Total % Total % of % of Avg Avg Avg # of accts Gal Growth Revenues Tot Revs Curn Rev/Gal GaUCust Rev/Cust Urban Residential 2,682 12,920,867 -0.9% S77.()66 37% 37% $().()()6 4,830 $28.77 Urban Commercial 76() 13,679,669 -0.2% $5173 1 25% 63% $().()()4 18,198 $69.95 Rural Residential 1.3()4 4,640,476 -1.0% $53,389 26% 89% $().()1.3 3,568 $41.00 Rural Commercial 95 1,952.458 1.0% $12.141 6% 94% $0.012 19,785 S 1 24.5 1 Bulk Water I,4 1 9,390 1.0% $11,574 6% 100% $0.009 avg: $206,900 100% annual revenues at this pace: $2,482,804 budget: $2,245,572 projected over/under: 1 %217.212 1 4 . .. - <,2 <21 ... *. *Fi glip~.4~,Ib nj.s~* - ~. ..., 4:.... 401:MWI=WI2:~#U=4 1 1 1 1 14.- 4..1 ~ ~ - r G,,4. .**h +, ijaw':-11 1 1 4.4.- 6 j*$.45'- 4 1 <0. 1 1 n (3 (7 (7 (7 (3 <7 C) Cl r-, r-, <65 Water Revenue Progress m Budgeted Revenues 1llaJJI13 le SenlleAeH â€¢ aoed 0 /2,06 â‚¬< 9, 4 . .. 9001 - ZOOZ - 000 AON 100 des 6nv Inf unr XeIN Jdv Jel/\1 qe:1 uer Actual Water revenues over/beyond Budget 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% %00-8 %009 %00.* %00-Z %00-0 I. . -9 0 0 S - 0 0 .C 2 S :3 0 (1) 0 .91 2 a. > 0 *-Illillillillillillillill CO 0 4- 10 C C O Budget Ieniov I zooz 9001 $2,600,000 $2,500,000 $2,400,000 $2,300,000 000'ooz'Z$ 000'OOL'1$ 000'000'1$ 000'006'LE