MEMORANDUM

Mayor and Council. October 23rd, 1978

FROM: L.D. Pollock
City Administrator

Re: Metered Water Rates - Agricultural Area

During our discussions on Metered Water Rates in the Agricultural
area, we had supplied Council with some incorrect information with respect to
the number of. properties likely to be affected by the change in regulations.
The list that was supplied to the Finance Committee, and subsequently forwarded
on to Council, was a list of the present metered connections and not a list
of the properties that were potentially affected by the new regulations.

The solution suggested by the Finance Committee at that time was
to continue to meter all services that presently receive the statutory
'Parmland' exemption and to remove from meters, all those properties that
were apparently 'residential' status, although they are in some cases large
acreage parcels.

I believe it was mentioned in the Council discussion that there
would be 15 to 17 properties that would be affected. This was taken from
the list that was considered by the Finance Committee. The actual number
of properties that have the 'Farmland' exemption and that have a water
connection at the present time, is 45. Twelve of these properties are already
on a meter, therefore there are 33 properties that would be affected by the
new regulation. In other words, as these 33 properties have the statutory.
‘farm’ exemption, they would be placed on the metered water rates. I don't
believe that this information changes the numbers significantiy as the new
regulations would delete 27 properties and add 33, with a very little net
effect on the revenue of the system for the year. Council's decision,
therefore, whether to stick with meters or abolish them, will not have any
significant effect on our total revenue for the year. It should also be
noted that if we do instal] the 33 additional meters, the cost is approximately
$150. each, of which the meter cost of $100. is recovered over a period of

- years.

Council: may wish to reconsider this whole question and, as mentioned
earlier, a decision could be made either way without drastically affecting the
Revenue of the system. The only reason the Treasurer reintroduced this item
was to avoid creating an additional category of flat rate user. Therefore, if
a flat-rate system is chosen for these 45 Farm operations, it would be best
established at the present residential flat rate, which under the new By-law
would be $5.00 per month.

. . It should also be noted that there are some metered operations in

LATE P Pepe gr ipeteural area, for example, greenhouse operations, that would no doubt
é rena iy on meter, and there is a provision in the By-law that would enable the

Bree to place a meter on any connection where he thought the usage required

RECEIVED ,

2 eect
ssceseannanesssengeessesseee PET

EE

OCT. 23.1978. | war Wied

Daan ten eee caren aren ayy: