Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 04-15-93 83 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF THE DISTRICT BOARD OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT HELD ON APRIL 15, 1993 The District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District convened in a regular meeting at its regular place of meeting, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, County of Contra Costa, State of California, at 3 p.m. on April 15, 1993. President Clausen called the meeting to order and requested that the Secretary call roll. 1. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Members: Menesini, Hockett, Rainey, Clausen ABSENT: Members: Dalton Member Dalton had indicated that he would be out of town and unable to attend this meeting, and had requested that he be excused. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Scott Wildman, Business Agent for Public Employees Union Local One, addressed the Board with regard to two issues. First, Mr. Wildman thanked the Board for their previous support and urged further support of efforts to keep local property taxes in local jurisdictions. Secondly, Mr. Wildman distributed an analysis of the District Personnel Budget and proposed alternative perspectives for the Board's consideration. Mr. Wildman stated that in terms of the Personnel Budget, there is a feeling by some employees that the decisions are arbitrary. Many employees fe~1 disenfranchised in terms of the process. Mr. Wildman stated that he wished to discuss these issues with the District management, not in meet and confer, but to try to come to an understanding with regard to implementing the proposed changes within the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). In response to a question from Member Menesini, Mr. Wildman stated that historically meet and confer has been the arena for discussing these issues; however, rather than collective bargaining, Local One feels it would be better to have this done in a more cooperative way. President Clausen thanked Mr. Wildman for his comments and stated that the Board would consider those comments and the concerns of the ratepayers during their deliberation of this matter. Mr. Roger J. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the Personnel Budget plans and process have been communicated with the affected employees. The District has been somewhat frustrated because the meet and confer process has been stalled due to Local One's scheduling delays. It is hoped that some progress will be made in the near future. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR Following discussion of the method used to secure the Barn Lane easements, it was moved by Member Rainey and seconded by Member Hockett, that the Consent Calendar, consisting of Items a. through j., be approved as recommended, resolutions adopted as appropriate, and recordings duly authorized. a. Resolution No. 93-029 accepting work and Offers of Dedication from Wesley E. Zocher, et ux, Job No. 4858, Parcel No.2, was adopted and recording was authorized. Motion approved on the following vote: .04 15 93 84 04 AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton b. Resolution No. 93-030 accepting work and Offers of Dedication from Robert D. Johnson, et ai, Job 4930, parcel No.2, was adopted and recording was authorized. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton c. Resolution No. 93-031 accepting work and Offers of Dedication from Summerhills Trails Incorporated, Job 4836, Parcel T, was adopted and recording was authorized. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton d. Grants of Irrevocable Licenses on Barn Lane were accepted from Richard and Georgia Kuchen, Nicholas and Elizabeth Kemsley, and George and Joan Denney; staff was authorized to record said documents with the Contra Costa County Recorder; and Resolution Nos. 93-032. 93-033. and 93-034 were adopted to that effect. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton e. Grant of easement from Eileen M. Parks, DP 20131, Parcel 007, was accepted at a cost of $8,687; the President of the District Board of Directors and Secretary of the District were authorized to accept and record said Grant of Easement; and Resolution No. 93-035 was adopted to that effect. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton f. Authorization was given for P.A. 93-6 (Orinda) to be included in a future formal annexation to the District. Motion approved on the following vote: 15 93 None 85 AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton g. The contract work for the construction of the Near Court Sliplining Project, DP 4535A, in Walnut Creek, was accepted and the filing of the Notice of Completion was authorized. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton h. The contract work for the construction of the 1991-1992 Sewer Renovation Pipe Replacement Project, DP 9556, was accepted and the filing of the Notice of Completion was authorized. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton i. Staff was authorized to secure the services of an arbitrator in accordance with the appeal procedures for the suspension of employees in the matter of Maintenance Crew Member II, Frank Shea. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton j. Resolution No. 93-026 was rescinded and revised Resolution No. 93-036 approving the purchase of Parcel 10254-01-01, 2,702 square feet, City of Orinda, was adopted in its place. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton 4. CALL FOR REQUESTS TO CONSIDER ITEMS OUT OF ORDER 04 93 15 86 a. 5. SOLID WASTE CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY BUDGET AND REQUEST FOR PAYMENT OF $13.664 FOR AN EIGHT MONTH ASSESSMENT FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 1. 1993 THROUGH DECEMBER 31. 1993. FOR OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY In response to a question from Member Menesini, Member Rainey, the District's representative on the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority (CCSWA), stated that during the next six months as the County comes to the table, regular reports will be made in terms of the progress towards achieving the objectives of the CCSWA work program. One of the purposes of CCSWA is to coordinate solid waste efforts throughout the County with an eye to saving money through that coordination. Member Menesini stated that he does not believe the County will be of benefit in that endeavor. Member Hockett suggested that an estimate be made of the in-kind contribution made by the District to CCSWA in terms of office space and related items. Mr. Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager, stated that he would develop those figures. Discussion followed concerning the formation of and representation on CCSWA. Member Menesini requested that the minutes reflect his concerns that he is not entirely pleased that the District is fostering a bureaucracy that he believe at this point has questionable contributions. Member Menesini stated that hå would vote for payment of the District's assessment and approval of the CCSWA budget, but he will request reports to see that its accountability is what it should be. Member Menesini stated that at this point he is mainly concerned about using the District ratepayers' money for something that he has concerns about. Member Rainey stated that Member Menesini is not alone in his concerns. Hopefully rates will be lowered by better coordination of solid waste activities. It was moved by Member Rainey and seconded by Member Hockett, that the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority budget be approved and that payment of $13,664 be authorized for the District's eight month assessment for the period May 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993 for operating expenses of the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority. Motion approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Menesini, Clausen NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Dalton It was noted for the record that Member Men~sini voted yes with reservations. b. PRESENTATION BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT REGARDING THE GREEN WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM IN THE CITY OF LAFAYETTE Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the District has become aware of problems with the green waste collection program in the City of Walnut Creek. Valley Waste Management is about to launch a green waste collection program in the City of Lafayette that is comparable to the Walnut Creek program. Valley Waste Management was asked to brief the Board on their plan and to obtain input from the Board prior to implementation. Ms. Harriette Heibel, of Valley Waste Management, distributed a handout and described the proposed Lafayette composting program. The key components of the program are as follows: . The customer supplies cans for yard waste. . The customer is entitled to two 32-gallon cans per week. . Cans must be placed at the curb. 04 15 93 87 . Yard waste will be collected on the same day as garbage. . The customer will be given two "yard trim only" decals for placement on cans. . Acceptable items include trimmings, grass, leaves, prunings, and rotten fruit and vegetables. . Unacceptable items include palm leaves, cactus, eucalyptus, food waste, manure, and pet wastes. . No garbage may be mixed with yard waste. . No plastic bags will be accepted. Ms. Heibel stated that on June 21, 1993, customers will be notified about the program; on July 6, 1993, customers will be notified of day changes; and on July 12, 1993, the green waste collection program will begin. It was suggested that this program be presented to the Lafayette City Council for their review and input, and that language be added to the letter to Lafayette customers indicating that the City Council has reviewed the program. Ms. Heibel agreed. Discussion followed concerning the "no brush" policy that established a rate for multifamily complexes which excludes yard waste collection. Ms. Heibel stated that the same approach is used in this case as for recycling. That is, to make the cost more palatable, it is spread over the entire rate base. The Board may wish to evaluate that in the future. Mr. Dolan recounted the history of the garden trimmings service and stated that in recent years there has been an increasing number of requests for a "no brush" rate for single family homes. Staff had planned to recommend that such a rate be considered during the next rate-setting process. President Clausen stated that there is some inconsistency in implementing a green waste collection program and promoting home composting. It is much more effective in achieving source reduction and recycling goals to collect the green waste. Ms. Heibel thanked the Board for their input and indicated that she would contact the Lafayette City Council to make a presentation on the green waste collection program. Member Hockett, the Board liaison to the City of Lafayette, indicated she would be happy to attend the Lafayette City Council meeting. 6. ADMINISTRATIVE 8. RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 86-194 AND ADOPT REVISED RESOLUTION REGARDING APPOINTMENT AND COMPENSATION FOR BOARD COMMITTEES Member Rainey, member of the Personnel Committee, stated that she and Member Dalton reviewed this matter and recommend adoption of a revised resolution deleting committees no longer in existence or on which Board Members no longer participate, and adding new committees. Additionally, the Personnel Committee wanted to be sure that it is clear that only delegates or alternates will be compensated as the official representatives of the District when attending meetings. President Clausen distributed and discussed revised Board Committee appointments corresponding with the proposed changes. Member Menesini objected to deletion of the Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA) Committee, stating that he does not believe that issue is dead. Member Menesini voiced support for continuing the TWA Committee to monitor TWA and any other potential external user of District facilities. Member Menesini expressed concern that TWA has been put on hold because they do not have a need at this time, but they may have a need at some point in the future. Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the resolution provides that the President of the Board can appoint on an ad hoc basis if the need arises. 04 15 93 88 Following discussion, it was moved by Member Rainey and seconded by Member Hockett, that Resolution No. 86-194 be rescinded and that Resolution No. 93-037 be adopted, setting forth the procedures for appointment to and compensation for Board Committees. Motion approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Rainey, Hockett, Clausen NOES: Members: Menesini ABSENT: Members: Dalton Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that the District discontinue its practice of scheduling an adjourned regular Board Meeting for the meeting of the Sanitation and Water Agencies of Contra Costa County. In the future, only the delegate and alternate will be compensated for attendance at that meeting. Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the District, stated that possible changes in the Brown Act relating to noticing requirements may cause the Board to reconsider the issue of standing committees in the future. 7. CORRESPONDENCE a. NOTE RECEIPT OF LETTER DATED MARCH 29. 1993 FROM WALNUT CREEK COUNCILMEMBER EVELYN MUNN. CONCERNING THE PLEASANT HILL/A-LINE FACILITIES The various interpretations that could be placed on language in the correspondence between the District and the City of Walnut Creek concerning sizing of the Pleasant HiII/A- Line facilities were discussed. Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that a letter could be drafted in response to Councilmember Munn's letter, indicating that the pipe was sized on the minimum pipe size to accommodate the anticipated flow from the District service area and sphere of influence; but as indicated in the position paper, there will be a modest amount of capacity that could accommodate growth outside the current service area. Member Menesini asked if the Pleasant Hill/A-Line facilities, as currently sized, could accommodate 40 mgd from Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA). Mr. Robert A. Baker, Deputy Chief Engineer, made a distinction between pipeline sizing and California Environmental Quality Act (CECA) requirements. When the Environmental Impact Report states that the pipe was not sized for TWA, that does not mean no flow from TWA can ever flow in that pipe. It means that no flow from TWA can ever flow through that pipe unless subsequent CEOA action is undertaken. The proposed 102 inch pipe size is inadequate to accommodate the 40 mgd flow from TWA which had been discussed but never proposed. Member Hockett suggested that rather than further explanation, a letter should be drafted requesting clarification of Councilmember Munn's understanding. Member Menesini stated that Councilmember Munn is simply asking if there is any capacity for TWA in the Pleasant Hill/A-Line facilities. To put this issue to rest, Member Menesini requested that the Board take formal action indicating that the District will not accept flows from TW A. Member Rainey stated that this Board cannot bind future Boards. Additionally, the District has never had a proposal from TW A and this Board has never taken a position of the issue. At this time when more and more agencies are working together on common issues, when the District is facing the loss of some or all of its $8 million ad valorem tax revenue, and when there is a possibility of an estimated $10 million buy-in that would save money for the District's ratepayers, it does not seem appropriate for this Board to close its mind without a proposal being made. Member Menesini stated that his opposition to this issue is environmentally related to the increased flow from TWA. Member Menesini stated that his main concern when millions of dollars of savings are discussed, is that the District is aggressively pursuing TWA and does not know how much money TWA is willing to pay. The District is pursuing a sacred cow that is not there. 04 15 93 89 Member Rainey stated that if TWA did not pay for capacity and service and if there was not proof that there would be no environmental impact, the District would not accept flow from TW A. Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, st1lted that staff will draft a response to the March 29, 1993 letter from Walnut Creek City Councilmember Evelyn Munn further explaining the sizing of the Pleasant Hill/A-Line facilities. b. NOTE RECEIPT OF LETTE.R DATED APRIL 5. 1993 FROM MR. CHARLES E. SANBORN. OF WALNUT CREEK. REQUESTING A SEPARATE RATE FOR GREEN WASTE COLLECTION: CONSIDER DRAFT RESPONSE The current refuse collection rate schedule, the rate setting process by which anticipated revenues and levels of service were established, and the idea of implementing a separate rate for green waste collection at this time, were discussed. In response to a question from Member Menesini, Messrs. Dolan and Aim described composting options actively being pursued by the District and the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority. Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that receipt of the letter dated April 5, 1993 from Mr. Charles E. Sanborn, of Walnut Creek, requesting a separate rate for green waste collection be noted and that the draft response be approved. 8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MINUTES OF MARCH 18. 1993 a. It was moved by Member Rainey and seconded by Member Hockett, that the minutes of March 18, 1993, be approved with the following correction. On page 8, the last vote was corrected to show that Member Menesini voted No. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Dalton being absent. b. MINUTES OF MARCH 25. 1993 It was moved by Member Rainey and seconded by Member Hockett, that the minutes of March 25, 1993, be approved as presented. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Dalton being absent. 9. APPROVAL OF EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURE LIST DATED APRIL 15. 1993 a. Member Menesini, member of the Budget and Finance Committee, stated that he and Member Hockett reviewed the expenditures and found them to be satisfactory. It was moved by Member Menesini and seconded by Member Hockett, that the Expenditure List dated April 15, 1993, including Self-Insurance Check Nos. 100678- 100681, Running Expense Check Nos. 74610-74795, and Sewer Construction Check Nos. 12316-12357, be approved as recommended. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Dalton being absent. 10. BUDGET AND FINANCE RECEIVE THE 1993-1994 EQUIPMENT BUDGET FOR REVIEW a. Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that copies of the proposed 1993- 1 994 Equipment Budget were provided to the Board and were reviewed in detail by the Board Committee. President Clausen, a member of the Board Committee reviewing the proposed Equipment Budget, indicated that he would be unable to support the purchase of the brush chipper requested by the Plant Operations Department. Mr. Dolan stated that he and Mr. Charles W. Batts, Plant Operations Department Manager, have reviewed the economic analysis of this requested purchase and concluded that the pay back would be two and one-half years. President Clausen was careful to give staff guidance on being 04 15 93 90 very thrifty; however, in this case it is a trade off between capital and operating expense. Mr. Dolan stated that staff is open to deleting the brush chipper from the Equipment Budget. If the Board wishes to leave it in, staff believes the justification is sound. Discussion followed with regard to use of the brush chipper by the Collection System Operations Department in addition to the Plant Operations Department. and cost for disposal of the material generated. President Clausen stated that the District must stop the practice of funding equipment purchases from the Capital Fund. The Board should consider delaying purchase of items if possible, approving only those items required for safety. Mr. Dolan, General Manager- Chief Engineer, briefly discussed creation of a sinking fund for purchase of replacement items. Mr. Dolan asked that Board Members submit any comments on the Equipment Budget to him. The Equipment Budget will be calendared for Board approval at the next Board Meeting. b. RECEIVE MARCH 1993 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Ms. Deborah Ratcliff, Controller, presented the operations and maintenance revenue report for the nine months ended March 31, 1993, reporting that revenues were $329,000, or 2 percent, underrealized. Ms. Ratcliff reviewed the results of operations and maintenance expenses for the month of March 1993, noting that expenditures were $145,000 less than budget, representing a 6.2 percent favorable variance. For the nine months ended March 31, 1993, actual O&M expenses were $1,137,000 less than budget, representing a 5.5 percent favorable variance. The District's temporary investments were held in Treasury bills and Treasury notes and the District's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) account with interest rates ranging from 3.9 percent to 6.2 percent. The latest interest rate was 3.9 percent. The average yield for the LAIF account was 4.7 percent. Following discussion, President Clausen noted that the March 1993 Financial Statements were duly received. None a. 04 . .,. 11. EMERGENCY SITUATIONS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION 12. REPORTS GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER 1 ) Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that as discussed previously with the Board, the District is responding to the 1992-1993 and proposed 1993-1994 ad valorem tax take-aways by cutting operating costs and trimming and postponing capital projects. This year's budget and capital plan are being prepared under this directive. In any event, a Sewer Service Charge increase will be proposed. Staff feels that the scale of the Sewer Service Charge increase will dictate the appropriate level of public communications effort to be undertaken. At the last Board Meeting, the idea of scheduling a series of community meetings to inform the public of a rate proposal on the order of two $30 increments was discussed. If the Board feels that a rate proposal on the order of $15 to $20 seems more appropriate, staff would not see a strong need to hold community meetings. Following discussion of integration of impacts on level of service and deferral of projects with proposed level of Sewer Service Charge increase and the probability that the State will take the remaining ad valorem taxes, it was agreed to table the idea of community meetings for the time being. 2) Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that a few months ago at a Board Meeting he attempted to explain the issue of the payment of the District's costs related to the recent Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA) 15 93 91 proposed project under which the District would charge TWA for sewer service. Outside engineering, staff work, fihancial consultants and legal fees were covered briefly. Soon after that meeting, Mr. Nejedly began making allegations concerning legal fees and reviewing the District TWA- related contracts, MOU's and financial records. In the interest of making available to the Board the same information which Mr. Nejedly has been through and on which he has based his charges, Mr. Bob Baker, Deputy General Manager, has prepared a review of the issue. Mr. Baker summarized the issues.raised by Mr. Nejedly as set forth in detail as items a. through e. in the document entitled TWA Legal Reimbursement Issue, April 8, 1993, copies of which were provided to the Board and by reference hereto is made a part of these minutes. a) Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Nejedly has alleged that District costs incurred between 1986 and 1989 relating to the original TWA proposal and original EIR were not reimbursed by TW A. Mr. Baker stated that is correct. District staff has never indicated the costs were reimbursed by TW A. They were reasonable and normal costs of doing business at the District. b) Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Nejedly has alleged that TW A was obligated by the January 7, 1991 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to reimburse the District for legal expense. Mr. Baker stated that this is not correct. There is no mention of legal expense in the MOU or any other document. There was no verbal understanding that TWA was to pay for legal expense. The District billed TWA for legal expense without a prior agreement on the issue. c) Mr. Baker stated that Mr..Nejedly has alleged that the $33,586.60 in legal expenses regarding TWA incurred since October 1990 have not been billed to TWA. Mr. Baker stated that is correct, those figures were provided to Mr. Nejedly by the District. TWA requested and was granted relief from paying the District's legal expense because the work was directed to protect the self interest of the District, not as part of the joint feasibility study. The District agreed to discontinue billing for legal expense after an initial billing of $1,554. Mr. Baker stated that TW A has reimbursed CCCSD for 81 percent of the $177,960 in total costs incurred by CCCSD since October 1990. d) Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Nejedly has alleged that the November 16, 1992 letter by Mr. Parke Boneysteele to Ms. Nancy Gore states that the District has billed TWA for all expenses related to TWA. Mr. Baker stated that the letter to Ms. Gore contains a confusing reference to costs. The letter is correct in its meaning regarding Concord legal billings, as Concord has never been billed for TW A- related legal expense. Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Nejedly mistakenly infers that the letter applies to the other cities of the District not served via contract and also mistakenly infers that the time reference in the letter refers to all current and all historical costs. Citizens of cities other than Concord would have paid a share of TW A legal expense. We have tried to make this distinction clear. e) Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Nejedly has alleged that District staff violated agreements that required TWA to reimburse the District for legal expense. Mr. Baker stated that this is incorrect. Mr. Baker said he is aware of no agreement, verbal or written, at the Board level or the staff level which requires TWA to compensate the District for legal expense. Mr. Baker then reviewed the attachments contained in the TWA Legal Reimbursement Issue document reading and referring to specific language relevant to Mr. Nejedly's assertations. In summary, Mr. Baker stated that 04 15 93 92 04 b. c. d. 4) there was no requirement of any sort for TWA to pay the District's legal fees. District staff believes they acted within their authority when billing of legal fees to TWA was discontinued. District staff believes that Mr. Nejedly is mistaken in his repeated assertions that TWA is required to reimburse the District for legal fees. Mr. Baker requested direction from the Board with regard to responding to Mr. Nejedly's allegations. Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the District, stated that he was asked to review the these documents and the minutes of District Board Meetings relating to this issue. Mr. Aim stated that he found no legal obligation for the District to seek reimbursemènt of these funds from TW A. Mr. Aim stated that he would be happy to provide a summary of the legal work done on this issue if the Board should wish. Mr. Aim stated that there was never an arrangement set up to bill directly on this project. In closing, Mr. Aim stated that Mr. Baker's comments reflect his recollection of what occurred. Following a brief discussion of the actual cost of the legal fees and the $1,554 paid by TWA for legal fees, President Clausen thanked Mr. Baker for his thorough presentation. 3) Mr. Dolan reported that the District has received requests for 750 video tapes on composting. Video tapes are also being placed in video stores, and it is planned they will be placed in libraries next fiscal year. Mr. Dolan stated that the District is currently advertising for bids on the following projects: the Overlook Drive Sewer Replacement Project, with an engineer's estimate of $105,000; the CSO Facilities Relocation Project, with an engineer's estimate of $1.5 million; and the Secondary Clarifier Project, with an engineer's estimate of $3.6 million. 5) Mr. Dolan announced that Member Menesini recently suggested that the signs announcing the entrance to the District be improved. That has been done. Pictures of the improved signs were shown. 6) Mr. Dolan announced that he will be attending a Water Environment Federation meeting in New Jersey the first week of May and will fly back Thursday morning, May 6, 1993, for the Board Meeting. COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT 1 ) Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the District, announced that there will be a briefing on the Acme litigation at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 1993, in the District's Board Meeting Room. SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT 1 ) Mr. Joyce E. Murphy, Secretary of the District, distributed the January- March 1993 Training/Conference Summary. BOARD MEMBERS 1 ) Member Rainey reported on the April 7, 1993 Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority (CCSWA) meeting at which adoption of the CCSWA budget, strategies for working with the County, and proposed Federal legislation relating to transportation of solid waste across state lines, were the primary topics of discussion. ! 2) Member Rainey reported on the April 15, 1993 Fiscal Unity meeting where work proceeded on development of the Fiscal Unity work program. 3) The proposed resolution opposing the taking of property tax revenue by the State of California was discussed and modifications were suggested. Board Members were asked to submit any further changes to the Secretary of the 15 93 District for incorporation into a revised resolution which will be calendared for Board consideration at the May 6, 1993 Board Meeting. 13. ANNOUNCEMENTS None 14. CLOSED SESSION None 15. ACTIONS RESULTING FROM DISCUSSIONS IN CLOSED SESSION None 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, President Clausen adjourned the meeting at the hour of 6:08 p.m. Pr)9si t of the Board of Directors, c'entral Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: e e ry of the Central C tra C ta Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California 04 15 93 93