Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 08-17-98 191 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF THE DISTRICT BOARD OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT HELD ON AUGUST 17, 1998 The District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District convened in an adjourned regular session in the Second Floor Conference Room, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, County of Contra Costa, State of California, at 2:35 p.m. on August 17, 1998. President Nejedly called the meeting to order and requested that the Secretary call roll. 1. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Members: Lucey, Menesini, Hockett, Boneysteele, Nejedly ABSENT: Members: None 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Joyce E. Murphy, Secretary of the District, announced that the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Lamorinda Recycled Water Project, a joint project of East Bay Municipal Utility District and Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, has been distributed and copies are available for Board review. 3. BIDS AND AWARDS a. AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO NV HEATHORN. INCORPORATED. FOR THE SLUDGE BLENDING TANK OVERFLOW DRAIN REALIGNMENT PROJECT. DP 6123. AND AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER- CHIEF ENGINEER TO ALLOCATE $75.000 FROM THE TREATMENT PLANT CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION Following explanation by Mr. Roger J. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, it was moved by Member Menesini and seconded by Member Hockett, that award of a construction contract in the amount of $63,764 for the construction of the Sludge Blending Tank Overflow Drain Realignment Project (DP 6123) be authorized to NV Heathorn, Incorporated, the lowest responsible bidder, and that the General Manager-Chief Engineer be authorized to allocate $75,000 from the Treatment Plant Program Contingency Account for DP 6123. There being no objection, the motion was unanimously approved. 4. TREATMENT PLANT a. AUTHORIZE $35.000 FROM THE COLLECTION SYSTEM CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LANDSCAPING AT THE SAN RAMON (LARWIN) PUMPING STATION (DP 6128) Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, introduced Mr. James M. Kelly, Director of Plant Operations, who provided an overview of the proposed improvements to the landscaping at the San Ramon (Larwin) Pumping Station. Mr. Kelly described the location of the San Ramon Pumping Station and showed slides of the pumping station exterior and the residential neighborhood in which it is located. Improvements to the front fencing and gates, planters and walkways, and landscaping are proposed to lessen the industrial appearance of the facility. Discussion followed with regard to future projects planned for the pumping station; the proposed landscaping improvements; and requesting and incorporating, where possible, input from the neighbors. It was moved by President Nejedly and seconded by Member Lucey, that the General Manager-Chief Engineer be authorized to allocate $35,000 from the Collection System Program Contingency Account for San Ramon (Larwin) Pumping Station Landscaping If\ C; 0(' 17 98 192 Improvements (DP 6128). approved. a. There being no objection, the motion was unanimously 5. ENGINEERING DISCUSSION OF POLICY ISSUES RELATING TO SEWER EXTENSIONS Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the District's Capital Program has shifted over the years. Initially it focused on primary treatment, then secondary treatment, then wet weather overflows, and now the emphasis is moving to new areas. In the future, the emphasis will be on maintenance of deteriorating infrastructure. Now, there is a major shift in focus to in-fill and extension of sewers into the extremities of the District to areas currently undeveloped or areas with failing septic tanks. Mr. Dolan introduced Mr. Charles W. Batts, Director of Engineering, who stated that there is a list of fundamentals or first principles used by Mr. Jay S. McCoy, Environmental Services Division Manager, and his staff in their work relating to sewer extensions. Mr. Batts reviewed these District sewering policy principles as follows: 0 {;~~':\ "'. ~I"'" , t:, . Every citizen deserves to have their health and the environment protected. . The District was created to: . Protect public health; and Protect water quality. . . The District sewer collection system is the District's main means of protecting public health. . The District treatment plant is the main instrument to protect water quality and the related environment. . The District infrastructure is the physical tool to accomplish this mission. . The District infrastructure is paid for by the ratepayers. . The main vehicles to fund infrastructure capital needs are: . Sewer Service Charge; Ad Valorem Taxes; and Connection Fees. . . . The District is llQ1 in the business of planning urban growth, but is dedicated to provide service wherever possible. . Properties must be annexed into the District in order to be served. . Every District ratepayer pays their own way into the District. . District ratepayers should run subsidize the infrastructure to serve development. . Orderly service expansion (infrastructure development) is part of the District's master planning efforts. . These planning guidelines are the basis for District staff's sewering decisions. . The Capital Improvement Budget and Plan are the financial tools used to ensure that proper funding is available for capital improvements. . Gravity service is used wherever possible. 17 98 193 . The District staff decides on and updates the size, location, and specifications of sewer lines. . Sewer lines are designed and constructed to be able to provide for the ultimate service area. . A separate side sewer is required for each property to connect to the public sewer line. . Public pumping stations are the least desirable alternative to gravity service. . District public sewers can be extended by: . Local Improvements Districts (LIDs); Contractual Assessment Districts (CADs); Private owners; Developers; and Action of the District Board of Directors. . . . . . The District will help finance CADs (with no gift of public funds). . Private providers of public sewer extensions may be reimbursed for portions of that expense by future connections to that specific sewer extension (Reimbursement Policy). . The District may mandate the gravity sewer option for development if it is the best long term, cost-effective option for the District. . The District may charge a higher Sewer Service Charge or other premium if sewer service requires a new public pumping station. . Difficult to serve lots or property on the periphery of the District may be served by individual private pumping stations until gravity service is an alternative. . The District does not finance private sewer facilities which connect to the District system. . The District may require individual pumping station owners to commit to connecting to a gravity alternative when and if one becomes available (and incur the additional costs associated with that connection). . District staff will decide the appropriate method to connect to the District facilities; these judgments may be brought to the full Board of Directors for reconsideration. Mr. Batts introduced Mr. Jay S. McCoy, Environmental Services Division Manager, who discussed policy issues relating to Contractual Assessment Districts (CADs). Mr. McCoy stated that currently CAD participants pay for non-participants' shares. An alternative would be to have the District bear the cost of non-participants' shares. Discussion followed with regard to social pressure within the neighborhood that tends to bring non-participants on board with the current method. Member Hockett expressed concern that the current policy does not provide an option for those who have failing septic tanks and need to participate in a CAD but cannot afford to do so. Member Hockett stated that there needs to be an option for those who cannot afford to participate. Specific to that issue, Mr. McCoy presented the next policy issue. Currently, the assessment payoff period is ten years and the reimbursement fee period is 20 years. An alternative would be to make the assessment payoff period 20 years and maintain the reimbursement fee period of 20 years. 00 0 98 17 194 Discussion followed in which concern was expressed about going to a 20-year assessment payoff period because the CAD program is growing and extending the assessment payoff period to 20 years would encumber more District funds for a longer period of time. Further discussion followed with regard to the suggestion that criteria be adopted for the exception allowing a 20-year assessment payoff period for those qualifying based on income, the position that the Board of Directors has the ability to deal with unique and individual problems as they arise, and the impact of placing a lien on the property to protect. Mr. McCoy reviewed the proposed method of calculation of reimbursement fees for non- participants (future buy-in cost) and distribution of the fee income. It is proposed that the reimbursement fees be calculated by dividing the project cost by the current number of participants and adding the total of interest payments to date on the original participants' cost. It is proposed that distribution of reimbursement fee income be calculated by taking the fee divided by the number of participants at the time of buy-in. It is proposed that the fee income be used to reduce outstanding principal and to directly pay participants with no debt to the District. Discussion followed with regard to the alternative procedures to be used for distribution of reimbursement fees if a home is sold during the life of the CAD, the impacts of placing a lien against the property, possible alternatives to a lien, and the difficulties involved in tracking individual owners as properties change ownership. Alternatives discussed included having the assessment or ownership of the money collected go to the original participant or run with the property. Following discussion, Mr. Dolan reviewed the key policy issues requesting direction from the Board. It was the consensus of the Board, with Me:mber Boneysteele voting no, that the participants pay for non-participants' shares. It was noted for the record that Member Boneysteele voted no because he believes that everyone should pay their own share. It was the unanimous opinion of the Board that the assessment payoff period remain at 10 years and that the reimbursement fee period remain at 20 years. It was the consensus of the Board that staff should work with District Counsel to develop a procedure for distribution of reimbursement fee income whereby the District would hold the money for a twelve-month period. If the money is unclaimed during the twelve-month period, any surplus over outstanding debt would go into the District's Sewer Construction Fund. Further discussion followed with regard to homeowners wishing to connect to the sewer system but unable to afford to do so; the fact that the CAD program was designed to address that issue; and the fact that once an ordinance is adopted codifying the CAD policy, it would be necessary for the Board to change the District Code to accommodate exceptions. Member Boneysteele stated that he does not feel comfortable with the proposed CAD Program. Member Boneysteele stated that he believes setting up a financial program using public funds is the province of the State rather than a special district. Mr. Dolan stated that assessment districts have been legislatively authorized by the State of California. However, the State does not get into this level of detail. Mr. Batts stated that in every aspect of the District, people pay their own way into the District whether through Local Improvement District (LID) fees, CAD fees, developer fees, or some other means. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of the Board, with Member Boneysteele reserving his vote, that the District CAD policy would be adopted to serve as a framework to accommodate 95 percent of the cases that come to the District and to provide a set of operating procedures for use by District staff. If an individual comes to the District who cannot afford to participate, it was recommended that this situation be considered on an individual basis at that time and the procedure modified as necessary rather than making an exception to the rule. O\ì 0 . .,...,,~ ~,)I' 17 98 195 Member Lucey asked that staff consider preparing a time line for distribution to the District's customers outlining the time it takes and the steps involved in going through these various processes. Mr. McCoy agreed that he would do that, and indicated that he is in the process of preparing a flow chart of the CAD process in which he will propose that some of the steps be consolidated to expedite the process for customers. 6. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS None 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, President Nejedly adjourned the meeting at the hour of 4: 1 0 p.m. to reconvene at 2:00 p.m. on September 3, 1998 for a Regular Board Meeting. ~nt,c-. {.. 7. /4 Presid t of the Board ö Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: at. n Se r t y of the Central Co ra Costa Sa . ary District, County of "Contra Costa, State of California 08 17 98