mr. harrington mentioned that in some ways, our budget may seem a little boring over the next couple of years because we of the operating under a relatively flat operating budget, and that is because we have had to bridge lower sales for water. if you look at our two-year budget that was adopted, it is growing to $860 million that we have adopted already for the two-year budget cycle. just a refresher, $75 million of that growth is planned debt service for the water in. program. the other $25 million is all cash -- capital. particularly in streetlight programs and also in the waste water program. these are the two changes that explain your one versus year two. -- your -- year one versus year two. what we're doing right now is meeting with the general manager's office, and they are updating the general manager about the planned goals, and this is the same way we presented them to you before. we will continue to report accordingly. last year, you also said that you were interested in seeing the budget not only by strategic goal but also by initiative, and those were running a world class utilit

mr. harrington talked about. right now, you have a very high water year. you want to know what that does to revenues or city's sales. at other times, you have a very low water year. you want to know what that does to revenues or costs. we work with power enterprise to do that. the model we developed with them involves setting rates for irrigation districts. you know the long-term capital plan costs. probably most importantly is when you serve electricity customers in the redevelopment areas, area, and understanding of what the costs are on an actual basis and the revenues, we build that into the model. as was mentioned, the goal was to get this to the development areas. just really two points on this slide. one was stated, we you have a carbon free resources. these surrounding resources do not have that. because of those, you have a very low costs. if you look at the main points, the costs for the power enterprise averages about 9 cents per kilowatt hour which is very low. pg&e has costs that are much higher, about 15 cents per kilowatt hour. in santa clar

mr. harrington walked through. those materials show the up to date -- up-to-date water and power generation. investors like to see that level of transparency, including these two bids. but the tax exemptions, you have five bidders. citigroup was the winning bid. whenever selling bonds competitively, the bidder has to buy everything or nothing. it goes to the lower bidder and the best deal for the rate payer. jpmorgan we also visited with earlier this morning. they have been very aggressive in bidding. they bought over $1 billion of our bonds over the next -- over the last 18 months. this was the most savings for the repairs, coming in at 4.5% annual true interest rate. the calendar for the water bond -- i mentioned we have sold $2.70 billion to date. what this means just on wsip, the water system improvement project -- we have locked in place six great costs that are paying -- that are saving the ratepayer $3.60 million. if we add on to that the refunding we have done on water, waste water, and the waste water bond

mr. harrington talked about. right now, you have a very high water year. you want to know what that does to revenues or city's sales. at other times, you have a very low water year. you want to know what that does to revenues or costs. we work with power enterprise to do that. the model we developed with them involves setting rates for irrigation districts. you know the long-term capital plan costs. probably most importantly is when you serve electricity customers in the redevelopment