Inside the model · 2027–2031
Three independent fund ledgers connect customer receipts, operating costs, capital work and financing. A household bill shows the customer impact; annual cash and coverage tests show whether the selected assumptions support the plan.
Independent public-data demonstration. Evidence cutoff: November 7, 2026. An executable scenario is an analytical possibility, not an adopted LCA tariff, financial forecast or legal approval.
Read the four numbered stages in order. Each fund passes through the same process independently. The optimizer repeats stages three and four over a finite set of candidate paths.
Opening unrestricted cash, customer collections, other receipts, expense, debt and capital are reconciled to the published closing balance. Grants and restricted cash stay separate.
Capital project schedules and published financing carry the plan forward. Future operating growth blends 75% CIP annual growth with 25% historical cost CAGR. Later levels are derived.
Change tariff uplifts, exposure, fixed and usage shares, demand, expense, grants and borrowing. Household tariff components and fund revenue assumptions remain distinct.
Check cash, cash days, coverage, rate limits and an optional bill ceiling every year. Compare the named central case with the selected scenario and identify every failed test.
A reporting total can summarize the three funds. It cannot transfer cash between them, absorb another fund's deficit or establish a contractual allocation.
The detailed 2027 schedules close at $7,546,095 Water, $10,447,425 Wastewater and $53,947,019 City. Restricted cash is excluded from spendable modeled cash. Unrestricted investments are not silently added to cash.
City summary and detailed schedule differ by $1. Expense and debt classifications also differ; the complete cash burden reconciles.
Future customer profiles follow the CIP user-charge ratios relative to 2027, rebased to budget receipts. Fees and other capital payments stay nominally flat. Investment income defaults to 100% retention, with a separate sensitivity.
Published future debt service is a schedule assumption, not a newly reconstructed amortization forecast.
Historical operating expense excludes depreciation and amortization but remains an accrual measure. Cash payments also reflect timing and classification. The 25% historical weight is a disclosed modeling judgment, not an estimated probability or measured optimal weight. Nominal forecasts include price and activity changes; no real-dollar or discounted welfare comparison is implied.
$361.312m five-year project plan, including administration
The central case retains the project schedules and allocated administration. The original condensed cash interpretation totals $355.712 million and remains a named alternative. Administration is already included in fund capital and is not added twice.
| Source component | Amount |
|---|---|
| Water project schedule | $32,860,000 |
| Wastewater project schedule | $20,197,000 |
| City share of administration | $762,500 |
| Central project-table interpretation | $53,819,500 |
| Original condensed cash table | $48,219,500 |
| Unresolved source difference | $5,600,000 |
Project AD-S-21 includes $5.6 million in 2029, matching the difference. The source does not explain its omission from the cash table. The central choice preserves full planned work; it does not certify project or financing approval.
The Planner’s financing charts recalculate from the exact same annual rows as its bills, unrestricted cash and ledger. They show the selected division and current scenario. Annual sources and uses exclude opening reserves so new money received during the year stays distinct from cash already held.
Sources: customer receipts, other operating receipts, investment income, capital receipts, planned and additional grants, planned and additional borrowing, and investment conversions.
Uses: operating payments, lease payments, other capital payments, base and additional debt service, and capital spending. Sources minus uses equals net movement; opening cash plus that movement equals ending cash.
Each annual capital-spending bar is paired with a stack of borrowing, grants and capital receipts. Their timing can differ. The table shows both positive capital less identified funding and funding above capital, without silently capping either.
This is an aggregate comparison, without project earmarking or approval claims. Operating surplus and opening unrestricted reserves can support capital. The residual is not a cash deficit or a required new loan.
The capital-funding comparison is separate from the debt-service coverage proxy; no LCA capital-coverage ratio is reconstructed. Capital recovery on bills is customer cash, distinct from grants and borrowing. The additional-debt control changes only hypothetical extra borrowing. Setting it to zero preserves published planned borrowing. Borrowing supplies cash but creates repayment obligations; it is excluded from operating income and the coverage numerator. Grant controls do not establish awards. Separate exact-value tables display nominal USD to cents; charts use USD millions and no rounding enters calculations.
Each chart links its categories to the financial glossary. The shared chart manifest defines the ordered categories, fields, colors, units and formulas for consistent analytical views. The ledger CSV includes both debt-service components, all source fields and the run’s model version and data fingerprint.
Customer impact
A bill combines its service-specific fixed, usage and applicable capital or other components. The planned 2027 tariff path is the starting option; later reference growth is 3% Water, an assumed 5% Wastewater and 5.8% City. Annual scenario uplifts start at zero.
An optional true 2026 freeze uses 2026 components. It is distinct from setting an uplift to zero. Usage and income controls describe the illustrative household.
Fund receipts
Retail exposure defaults are approximately 91.674% Water, 4.485% Wastewater and an assumed 70% City. These reflect different evidence and scope. Fixed / usage shares default to 30% / 70%, 30% / 70% and 40% / 50%; City's remaining 10% is a separately modeled add-on component.
These shares are selectable proxies, not a class cost-of-service allocation. Elasticity uses the weighted usage and add-on price index; industrial shocks affect those volume buckets. Changing the household's gallons never changes the fund's mix.
Separate account-growth and aggregate-volume controls affect exposed fixed and usage/add-on receipts respectively. Their identical default plan proxy is not a pair of calibrated demand estimates. Historical water-unit and volume trends are scope-limited proxies. Industrial volume and residential revenue shares differ by geography, tariff and unit. Municipal pass-throughs, industrial surcharges and add-on charges require their own assumptions. Do not scale grants, investment income or capital fees as retail sales.
Capital fees, grants, borrowing and investment conversions are excluded from this numerator. Other capital payments remain in the cash ledger, outside this proxy. This planning proxy is distinct from published indenture coverage. Cash days divide closing unrestricted cash by operating expense per day; inspect the dashboard's stated denominator and selected floor.
The search enumerates three path patterns on a 0.1 percentage-point grid. A selected lever applies retail increases, a balanced contract assumption or add-on charges. Every candidate runs through the same annual ledger and tests.
Objectives minimize peak bill growth or total nominal bills within that candidate family. No global continuous optimum, legal pass or calibrated probability of success is claimed.
Additional loans are drawn during the horizon and begin level annuity payments the following year. Most loan principal can remain after 2031. Terminal extra debt and the associated annual payment remain visible, so lower near-term bills cannot conceal later obligations. Baseline CIP debt also continues beyond the modeled horizon.
Public source values, derived calculations, assumptions and unresolved agreements carry separate statuses. These primary sources support the model; they do not eliminate the need for a finance and agreement review.
Data provenance · Agreement and constraint review · Public model comparisons · Return to dashboard