HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 04-21-72
61
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE DISTRICT BOARD
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
HELD APRIL 21, 1972
The District Board of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District convened
in a Regular Session at its regular place of meeting located at 1250 Spring-
brook Road, Walnut Creek, County of Contra Costa, State of California, on
April 21, 1972, at 8:00 o'clock P.M.
The meeting was called to order by President Allan.
I.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
ABSENT:
Members:
None
President Allan expressed his great pleasure and that of the Members
of the Board of Directors in awarding certificates of proficiency from
the California Water Pollution Control Association to Mr. Roy E. McDowell,
Mr. J. Keith Packwood and Mr. Theodore B. Smith, employees of the District.
Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated the District has the
largest number of employees in the State holding Certificates of Proficiency
for operation of water treatment plant facilities. Mr. Horstkotte commended
Mr. David Niles, Superintendent of Plant Operations, for his program for in-
creasing operator efficiency.
II.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Meeting of April 6, 1972.
After comments by Members Mitchell and Boneysteele, it was moved by
Member Mitchell, seconded by Member Rustigian, that the Minutes of the
meeting of April 6, 1972, be approved after making the following changes:
Under "VII. NEW BUSINESS, MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR", add the following
to the penultimate paragraph:
"Mr. Bohn will report back to the Board.
To be continued."
Under "VIII. REPORTS, GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER", delete the
last paragraph and substitute the following:
"After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, and discussion by staff and
Members of the Board, it was the consensus of the Board that present Petty
Cash Fund procedure be referred to the District Auditor for review and com-
ment. It was then moved by Member Boneysteele, seconded by Member Mitchell,
that authorization to increase the monthly Petty Cash Fund from $300.00 to
$500.00 be approved. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None"
Under "VIII.
read:
REPORTS, COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT", change paragraph to
"Mr. Bohn reported receipt of a check in the amount of $5,831.50 for
the District as a result of the Western Pipe litigation."
Motion changing Minutes of the meeting of April 6, 1972, carried by
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitèhell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
04
21
72
62
III.
APPROVAL OF EXPENDITURES
None.
IV.
HEARINGS
DISTRICT REVENUE PROGRAM
President Allan welcomed persons in the audience and then reopened the
hearing on the proposed District Revenue Program from the April 13th meeting.
Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated staff had met
with Mr. Norman Alumbaugh, President of the Homebuilders Association of
Contra Costa and Solano Counties and Mr. Dean LaField, Executive Vice Presi-
dent of the same organization who were present in the audience. Mr. Horstkotte
stated that, as a result of that meeting, staff was recommending certain amend-
ments to Chapter 11, Fees and Charges, of the District Code. Mr. Horstkotte
clarified the issue of intensity (number of people per acre) as vs. density
(number of units developed per acre) and then suggested that Mr. LaField report
on a Federal Housing Administration regional study on planned units develop-
ments as compared to residential developments.
Mr. LaField apologized that the FHA study was not available at this
time as it would have illustrated current trends in housing construction
with numbers of people per dwelling unit. Mr. LaField then presented the
Board Members and staff with four prepared papers which depicted the impact
of the proposed fee schedule on a per capita basis for various types of
living units. Board Members and staff queried Mr. LaField and discussed
various aspects of his analysis on fee charges with Members Gibbs and
Boneysteele requesting clarification from staff on the applicability of
the density multiplier to the minimum and unit fixture charge. After ex-
planation, it was suggested by Member Boneysteele that staff revise Section
11-306 of Chapter 11 to more clearly reflect the procedure for computing
fixture charges.
Mr. LaField presented a detailed explanation to the Board Members as
to why he and the organization he represented were opposed to the proposed
fixture charges delineated in Chapter 11, Fees and Charges. Mr. LaField
urged the Board Members to base the fee schedule on a per capita basis,
claiming this was more equitable than being based upon number of fixtures
being connected to the sewage system. Mr. LaField stated as justification
for his position that the current and foreseeable trend was toward a land
use intensity philosophy in home development and that the average family
occupancy ratio should not exceed two persons. Board Members and staff
queried Mr. LaField throughout his presentation and various aspects of
his proposal were discussed at length. The proposal of the staff, and
this was supported in general by several Board Members, was that the fee
schedule should be predicated on number of fixtures connected to the sewage
system. The premise for adopting this position was that, historically,
data delineating actual number of fixtures connected was directly related
to total usage of the sewage system, indirectly reflected size of popula-
tion and was, therefore, an accurate guage for projecting capacity
requirements for the collection system and treatment facilities. It was
noted by some Board Members that utilizing population figures as criteria as
proposed by Mr. LaField for projecting capacity requirements could be fal-
lacious as they are subject to fluctuation. The District could exert no
control over this population fluctuation. Board Members, staff and Mr.
LaField briefly discussed the impact population density can have on existing
sewage facilities, particularly in regard to capacity.
Mr. Norman Alumbaugh addressed the Board. Mr. Alumbaugh supported
Mr. LaField and emphasized that the fee schedule should be predicated
upon people and not number of fixtures connected to the sewage system.
He cited as examples that there were several building developments in
California wherein the average occupancy ratio was less than two persons;
that the current trend was toward smaller families; school population was
diminishing; and that in his personal development Sky West, up to 80 per-
cent of the three bedroom units had to be converted to two bedroom units
because the occupancy ratio was below two persons. Mr. Alumbaugh stressed
that persons per acre was declining with the advent of the new building
construction trend toward land use intensity and, therefore, while there
may be more fixtures, their use would be less because of fewer people.
04
21
72
63
Board Members and staff commented on Mr. Alumbaugh's remarks with
Members Mitchell and Gibbs in agreement that basing the fee schedule on
number of fixtures connected to the sewage system was a more responsive
method for depicting usage and capacity requirements for treatment faci-
lities.
Mr. LaField invited the attention of Board Members to the fact that
his association was also concerned with the proposed increases in annexa-
tion and inspection fees, which had not been discussed but which were pro-
posed to increase 50 percent. He commented that the housing industry had
a basic requirement to provide adequate housing and suggested that alterna-
tive approaches could be jointly explored by staff and his organization,
given sufficient time. Member Gibbs moved adoption of Chapter 11, Fees
and Charges, to the District Code subject to future amendment. After com-
ment by Mr. Horstkotte that Chapter 11 would not become effective until
July 1, 1972, Member Gibbs withdrew his motion.
Mr. Ray Klauff addressed the Board. Mr. Klauff, a local home de-
veloper, stated he tended to favor a reduction in fixture charge mini-
mums as being more equitable. In addition, he commented that it was
his opinion that, with density of population, the burden upon the District
to service the concentration of people would be less because of fewer lat-
eral sewage lines.
Mr. M. K. Carter addressed the Board. In his remarks, Mr. Carter
expressed his appreciation for the cooperation extended by staff and
congratulated the District on receiving approval of its expansion program
by the Association of Bay Area Governments. Mr. Carter then presented,
with aid of a prepared paper, a concise statement which indicated that
District revenue requirements for the expansion program could be best
met by raising the current tax rate of 43 cents to 61 cents, vice esta-
blishment of an Environmental Quality Charge of $24.00 per year. Mr.
Carter emphasized that greater benefit would accrue to the District
taxpayer if the Members of the Board would abandon the Environmental
Quality Charge in favor of a higher rate of taxes. Mr. Horstkotte
corroborated the accuracy of Mr. Carter's analysis. Board Members,
staff and Mr. James Carniato, representing Mr. Bohn, Counsel for the
District, discussed at length Mr. Carter's proposal. A major point
of discussion was whether the District could abandon the Environmental
Quality Charge, resort to increased taxes, impose special sewage service
charges upon industrial and commercial users, and still meet State and
Federal requirements for grant fund approval. Mr. Carniato indicated
that in his opinion the District could abandon the Environmental Quality
Charge in favor of a higher tax rate and still impose special sewer ser-
vice charges on industrial and commercial users. However, imposition
of the special sewer service charge would require an individual ruling in
each case by the Board with multi-family units being exempt from this
charge. Mr. Horstkotte stated staff had explored this matter with the
District's Special Counsel, the consequence of which was that imposition
of a sewer service charge to residential users was not necessary. Mr.
Horstkotte then read from a resume made by the Library of Congress of
the Blatnik Bill No. 11896, Section 206, which pertains to conditions
necessary in order to qualify for grant funds after June 1, 1973. Mem-
ber Mitchell noted that Board Members have historically favored the ad
valorem tax as opposed to an Environmental Quality Charge as advocated
by staff. Mr. Horstkotte commented that Board Members could accept Mr.
Carter's proposal at present but that, in his opinion, establishment
of an Environmental Quality Charge will be necessary in the future.
In support of this position, Mr. Horstkotte cited the newly adopted
State of California Uniform Accounting System for Sanitary Districts,
and read excerpts from the State Water Resources Control Board Revenue
Program Guidelines for waste water agencies and the Clear Water~ant
Program Regulations which pertain to user service charges.
Mr. M. K. Carter responded to Mr. Horstkotte's comments by stating
the basic decision before the Board was whether to establish the Environ-
mental Quality Charge in anticipation that such a charge may eventually
become a requirement or accept the comments of the Counsel for the District
that imposition of such a charge was not yet mandatory. Mr. Carter sug-
gested that, by postponement of the Environmental Quality Charge, if only
for a one year period, the Board Members would be doing the District tax-
04
21
72
-----------'----------'----------------------- - --------.--...--------------------------.---------------.----------------------.---...---- - ---..-------.------
64
payers a great service. Further, Mr. Carter stated that in the event,
at some future date, establishment of the Environmental Quality Charge
for residential users became a requirement, he would be the first to ap-
pear before the Board and urge its adoption.
President Allan commented that, in the event the Watson Amendment was
to be approved, the stringent restrictions imposed upon special district's
authority to levy taxes would require immediate establishment of fue En-
vironmental Quality Charge. Assuming the passage of the Watson Amendment,
Board Members briefly discussed how and when the Watson amendment would
be implemented and its possible impact upon the District.
Member Gibbs commented that personally he has for many years opposed
user service charges primarily because of income tax considerations. How-
ever, the Board has been advised that as the Environmental Quality Charge
is planned to be collected on the tax rolls, Member Gibbs suggested there
is a good reason to believe the charge will be considered tax deductible.
Member Gibbs cited as precedent for establishment of user service charges,
the many sanitary agencies within the State, including East Bay Municipal
Utility District, which impose this type of charge in conjunction with the
ad valorem tax. He noted that the Sanitary District is probably one of
the few Districts that currently rely on the ad valorem tax as its major
source of revenue. Member Gibbs suggested therefore that adoption of the
Environmental Quality Charge by the Sanitary District would not be a
unique action. But rather, that perhaps to some extent, it would be re-
flective of the current trend throughout the State to provide some form
of relief for the property taxpayer by substitution of user service charges.
He noted that Board Members have given considerable thought for at least
seven years to the question of user service charges and that basically,
because only people who use the service pay the charge, the element of
equity does exist.
Member Boneysteele noted that his interpretation of the current income
tax instructions is that one can deduct taxes that are based upon value of
property, but that, as an example, a charge for registration of an automo-
bile is not deductible. Member Boneysteele stated that therefore he is by
no means assured that District taxpayers could deduct the Environmental
Quality Charge.
Member Boneysteele noted that his interpretation of the current income
tax instructions is that one can deduct taxes that are based upon value of
property, but that, as an example, a charge for registration of an automo-
bile is not deductible. Member Boneysteele stated that therefore he is by
no means assured that District taxpayers could deduct the Environmental
Quality Charge.
Member Mitchell noted that he had originally thought it feasible for
the County tax collector to incorporate the Environmental Quality Charge
into the total taxes assessed but that he now recognized that taxes assessed
and the Environmental Quality Charge would have to be shown separately on
the tax bill. Mr. Horstkotte commented that the County tax collector actually
has the option of either billing the Environmental Quality Charge separately
or including the charge on the tax bill. Member Mitchell observed that if
Member Boneysteele's interpretation was valid that charges based upon value
were tax deductible, then it was unlikely the Environmental Quality Charge
would qualify as a deductible item even though not related to service. This
led to further discussion by Board Members and staff with Mr. Horstkotte
stating the District had no choice in the matter of levying a user service
charge upon industry. This was mandatory.
Mr. Horstkotte indicated to Board Members that staff's decision to
propose establishment of an Environmental Quality Charge was made after
analyzing the use of the sewer service charge by agencies in over 5,600
communities throughout the United States. He then noted that the Sanitary
District was fortunate that alternative methods were available to finance
operations of the District. Mr. Horstkotte congratulated Mr. Carter on
his presentation but stated, while the District could finance its operations
by use of the ad valorem tax, he suggested the Environmental Quality Charge
to receive sewer service would be more equitable, citing as example the
owner of a two bathroom home appraised at a value of $80,000.00 vs. the
owner of a two bathroom home appraised at a value of $10,000.00. A brief
04
21
72
b)
discussion followed concerning the matter of equity in levying charges and/
or taxes upon District residents. Member Mitchell expressed his appreci-
ation to Mr. Carter for his analysis of the revenue program. He noted that
only owners of homes appraised in value that exceeded $40,000.00 would be
paying a disproportionate share for sewer service whereas others owning homes
appraised at lesser value would in fact achieve a savings. It was Member
Mitchell's opinion that adoption of the ad valorem tax method to finance
the District's expansion program would in general be more equitablero all
residents of the District. Member Mitchell expressed his concern regarding
staff's proposal to establish the Environmental Quality Charge rate at
$2.00 per month and indicated he did not think it prudent to reduce the
current District's tax rate. Mr. Horstkotte stated his guidance to staff
in the preparation of the proposed revenue program took cognizance of
previous Board's policy in adopting declining tax rate over a period of
years. Board Members, staff and Mr. Carniato, acting Counsel for the
District, discussed various ramifications of imposing an Environmental
Quality Charge vs. resort to the use of the ad valorem tax. As a result
of the discussion, Mr. Horstkotte recommended that the Board consider resort
to the ad valorem tax method for the next fiscal year versus the Environ-
mental Quality Charge and that in the interim, staff would obtain the views
of the grant administrator for the State Water Resources Board as to whether
such a course of action was acceptable. Mr. Horstkotte noted that another
Board Meeting would be necessary prior to May 1, 1972.
Mr. Richard Correl1i, a resident of Martinez, California, addressed
the Board. Mr. Correlli commented on the Watson amendment and its possible
impact upon the District's financial program. A brief discussion followed.
Mrs. Margaret Coney, a resident of the District, addressed the Board.
Mrs. Coney stated she recognized the need for expansion of the District's
treatment facilities and expressed her support for the use of the ad valorem
tax method and an industrial user service charge to finance the program.
Concerning the schedule for fixture charges, Mrs. Coney reported the results
of a personal survey she had conducted regarding her local area wherein the
medium population density was approximately three persons per acre.
Mr. Lew Coney, a resident of the District, addressed the Board. Mr.
Coney stated that, in his opinion, the Board had adopted the correct ap-
proach in basing fees and charges on number of fixtures connected to the
sewage system. He further commented that population density was not an
adequate criteria to project burden or capacity requirements for treat-
ment facilities.
There being no other persons in the audience who wished to address the
Board, Mr. Horstkotte indicated to Board Members that the District required
an approved revenue program prior to May 1, 1972, in order to qualify for
grant funds. Board Members, staff and Mr. Carniato, representing Mr. Bohn,
Counsel for the District, discussed at length the manner and administrative
procedure for implementing the proposed revenue program. Upon advice of Mr.
Carniato, it was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded by Member Gibbs, that
Ordinance 86, Chapter 11, Fees and Charges, as proposed by staff and as
amended by the Board to reflect a zero cost for the Environmental Quality
Charge, be adopted. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
It was recommended by Member Mitchell, with concurrence of Member
Rustigian, that the Board adopt a Resolution stating that, as a matter of
policy, it was the intention of the Board that, for fiscal year 1972-73,
revenue necessary to finance the District's expansion program, and as not
provided by other revenue sources, will be provided by resorting to the
ad valorem tax; establishment of the tax rate to be determined by the Board
after receipt of the District's assessed valuation from the County of Contra
Costa.
04
21
72
ób
RESOLUTION NO. 72-22. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT ESTABLISHING DISTRICT POLICY
WITH REGARD TO THE OBTAINING OF MONIES NECESSARY TO COMPLETE WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT EXPANSION AND WASTE WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT
It was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded by Member _Rustigian, that
Resolution No. 72-22 be adopted. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
President Allan closed the public hearing.
V.
BIDS
None.
VI.
OLD BUSINESS
AUTHORIZATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR ENGINEERING STUDY FOR DISTRICT
SEWERING PROJECT 2121 (NEGOTIATION OF RIGHT OF WAY WITH EAST BAY MUNICIPAL
UTILITY DISTRICT)
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, it
was moved by Member Gibbs, seconded by Member Boneysteele, that authorization
in the amount of $2,000.00 from Sewer Construction funds for Engineering Study
for District Sewering Project No. 2121 be approved. Carried by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
RESCIND APRIL 6. 1972 AUTHORIZATION FOR $41.800.00 FOR ADDITIONAL DEPOSIT
TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT FOR
DISTRICT SEWERING PROJECT NO. 1997, SAN RAMON CREEK. WALNUT CREEK
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer,
that the Flood Control District was no longer going forth with its project,
it was moved by Member Rustigian, seconded by Member Gibbs, that Board
action of April 6, 1972, authorizing additional deposit of $41,800.00 to
the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District be
rescinded. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
DISTRICT ORDINANCE PROHIBITING SOFT WATER REGENERATION DISCHARGES
At request of Mr. Carniato, representing Mr. Bohn, Counsel for the
District, item was continued to meeting of May 10, 1972.
DISTRICT ORDINANCE EXTENDING REBATE RECOVERY PERIOD
At request of Mr. Carniato, representing Mr. Bohn, Counsel for the
District, item was continued to meeting of May 10, 1972.
APPROVAL OF DISTRICT CONTRACTUAL FORM TO REPLACE PETITIONS FOR LOCAL
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROCEDURES
After explanation by Mr. Carniato, representing Mr. Bohn, Counsel for
the District, that further coordination was necessary between offices of
Counsel for the District, Special Counsel for the District, and with the
County, item was continued.
'.".. 41:
U
21
~t ,,'}
l -.(.¿
67
REPORT BY REPRESENTATIVES OF BECHTEL CORPORATION
Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, introduced Mr. George
Sawyer and Dr. Clark Weddle. Mr. Sawyer stated the Water Renovation pilot
plant project was nearing final completion and that a final report by Bechtel
Corporation would be forthcoming. Mr. Sawyer then provided Board Members
with a study prepared by Bechtel Corporation for use by the District's
Negotiating Committee with Contra Costa County Water District on water
reclamation. Mr. Sawyer explained in detail the results of the study and
the manner in which Ks analyses on allocation of costs were derived for
water reclamation facilities. Board Members and staff posed questions
throughout Mr. Sawyer's presentation and various aspects of the study
were discussed. Member Gibbs, as Chairman of the District's Negotiating
Committee, gave a detailed report on the progress of the Committee's ne-
gotiations with the Water District to finalize a contract for the sale of
reclaimed water. Member Boneysteele made additional comments on the con-
duct of negotiations. Board Members, staff and Mr. Sawyer discussed at
length various aspects of the proposed contract, its contents and obli-
gations imposed upon the District. Mr. Sawyer gave further explanation
of his analyses on water reclamation costs, particularly as related to
the proposed contract. Discussion by Board Members and staff followed.
After suggestion by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, that
staff from both the Water District and Sanitary District, together with
District Counsel meet in a further attempt to resolve points of conflict
in the contract, it was agreed that the Board would meet on April 26,
1972, to consider the matter further.
CONSENT ITEMS
VII.
NEW BUSINESS
ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENTS AT NO COST TO THE DISTRICT
It was moved by Member Gibbs, seconded by Member Rustigian, that
easem~nts, at no cost to the District, from Castle Hill Court Associates,
Job 2095, Parcell, Laird Bickmeyer and Judith F. Bickmeyer, Job 2127,
Parcell, and James C. McCarthy and Alice McCarthy, Local Improvement
District No. 51, Parcel 8, be accepted and their recording ordered.
Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian andAllan
None
None
RESOLUTION NO. 72-18. A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT FROM MAY 4,
1972, TO MAY 10, 1972
It was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded by Member Boneysteele, that
Resolution No. 72-18 be adopted. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneystee1e, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
RESOLUTION NO. 72-19, A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ELIGIBLE LIST. ENGINEERING AID I
After brief discussion by Member Mitchell, Chairman of the Personnel
Committee, it was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded by Member Boneysteele,
that Resolution No. 72-19 be adopted. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
RESOLUTION NO. 72-20, A RESOLUTION APPOINTING DALE A. OHDA AND JAMES R.
RUETENIK. ENGINEERING AID I
It was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded by Member Boneysteele, that
Resolution No. 72-20 be adopted. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None 0 4
Ii ~
21
68
APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY SUMMER HELP. 1972
After comment by Members Mitchell and Boneysteele, and explanation by
Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, regarding the scope of the
temporary summer help program, it was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded by
Member Boneysteele, that the proposed Temporary Summer Help 1972 be approved.
Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
RESOLUTION NO. 72-21, A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JASPER GREEN, PLANT MAINTENANCE
FOREMAN AND CHESTER GRAHN, PLANT MAINTENANCE MAN
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer, it
was moved by Member Gibbs, seconded by Member Rustigian, that Resolution No.
72-21 be adopted. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT AND CALL FOR EXAMINATION FOR POSITION OF ASSISTANT
PLANT OPERATOR. RANGE 41
It was moved by Member Rustigian, seconded by Member Gibbs, that
authorization for advertisement and call for examination for position of
Assistant Plant Operator, Range 41, be approved. Carried by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENTS AT NO COST TO THE DISTRICT AND RE-RECORDING
It was moved by Member Gibbs, seconded by Member Mitchell, that
easements from Florina Fiora and Olga Bresso, Job 1924, Parcel 2, Felix
Valenzano, et al, Job 1924, Parcel 3, Fred Bugnatto and Rena M. Bugnatto,
Job 1927, Parcel 4, and E. Pordon and Rose Pordon, Job 1924, Parcel 5
be accepted and their re~recording ordered. Carried by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
AUTHORIZATION FOR TREATMENT PLANT PERSONNEL TO ATTEND LOCAL INDUSTRIAL
SAFETY CONFERENCE AT A TOTAL COST OF $38.50
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer,
that staff proposed attendance by additional personnel of the Maintenance
Department for an additional cost of $27.50, it was moved by Member Rustigian,
seconded by Member Boneysteele, that authorization for staff personnel from
the treatment plant and the Maintenance Department to attend a local Industrial
Safety Conference at a total cost of $66.00 be approved. Carried by the fol-
lowing vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
OTHER BUSINESS ADDED BY SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA
AUTHORIZATION FOR PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY TO EXECUTE RECLAIMED
WATER CONTRACT WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
Item continued.
04
21
72
69
AUTHORIZATION FOR $5,000.00 FOR ENGINEERING AND RIGHT OF WAY COSTS,
DISTRICT SEWERING PROJECT 2187. PACHECO AREA
After explanation by Mr. Best, Office Engineer, it was moved by Member
Gibbs, seconded by Member Mitchell, that authorization in the amount of
$5,000.00 from Sewer Construction fund for engineering and right of way costs
for District Sewering Project 2187 be approved. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
AUTHORIZATION FOR PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH
STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR RELOCATION OF FACILITIES NEAR STATE ROUTE
680, DIABLO ROAD INTERCHANGE. JOB 2120
It was moved by Member Gibbs, seconded by Member Boneysteele, that
authorization for President and Secretary to execute agreement with State
of California for relocation of facilities near State Route 680, Diablo
Road Interchange, be approved. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
AUTHORIZATION TO EMPLOY HARRY WHARTON. TEMPORARY PAINTER'S HELPER
AT $4.04 PER HOUR
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer,
that District personnel had currently been doing all interior painting for
Office Building Expansion 1972, it was moved by Member Mitchell, seconded
by Member Boneysteele, that authorization to employ Harry Wharton, temporary
painter's helper, at $4.04 per hour be approved. Carried by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
ACCEPTANCE OF $1,000.00 DEPOSIT FROM DEVELOPERS FOR DISTRICT
NEGOTIATION OF RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION, PRIVATE JOB NO. 2113,
ORINDA AREA
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chief Engineer,
it was moved by Member Gibbs, seconded by Member Mitchell, that acceptance
of $1,000.00 deposit from developers for District negotiation of right of
way acquisition, private Job No. 2113, Orinda area, be approved. Carried
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
Members Rustigian and Boneysteele commented that resort to the sup-
plemental agenda should be reserved for items of an emergency nature.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Member Boneysteele stated Mrs. Kris Hiller of the District's Advisory
Committee on Solid Waste had desired to attend the Board Meeting. In her
absence, Member Boneysteele explained the matters that were of concern to
her particularly in relation to plant incineration of sludge as opposed to
proposals by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection
Agency for a program of land distribution of sewage sludge. A brief dis-
cussion between Board Members followed. Staff was requested to obtain a
copy of the Army Corps of Engineers report.
Member Boneysteele commented on a meeting held by the Association of
Bay Area Governments which he and staff had attended on April 20,1972.
Member Boneysteele commended Mr. Horstkotte, General Manager-Chieffugineer,
04
21
72
-----------.-- -------.---------. ------.---
70
for his excellent presentation on behalf of the District's proposed expansion
program before the executive committee of ABAG. A brief discussion followed.
VIII.
REPORTS
COMMITTEES
Member Boneystee1e noted that Board Members had received a copy of the
Advisory Committee on Solid Waste minutes of the meeting of April 5, 1972.
Member Gibbs indicated he planned to attend the next Advisory Committee
meeting scheduled for April 25, 1972.
GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte that he and Mr. Niles, Superintendent
of Plant Operations, proposed a three day trip to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
to monitor progress on the Sharples vertical centrifuges planned for instal-
lation in the expanded treatment plant, it was moved by Member Boneysteele,
seconded by Member Gibbs, that authorization for the trip with per diem of $32.00
for Mr. Horstkotte and Mr. Niles be approved. Carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, it was moved by Member Boneysteele,
seconded by Member Gibbs, that authorization to pay Mr. Mark Ivory salary for
twenty-five days of accumulated vacation be approved. Carried by the fol-
lowing vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
After explanation by Mr. Horstkotte, it was moved by Member Boneysteele,
seconded by Member Gibbs, that authorization to pay Mr. Robert Hedgecock
salary for ten days of accumulated vacation be approved. Carried by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members:
Members:
Members:
Boneysteele, Gibbs, Mitchell, Rustigian and Allan
None
None
COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT
None.
SECRETARY
None.
IX.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:52 o'clock
to 8:00 o'clock P.M.,
P.M., President Allan adjourned the regular meeting
Wednesday, APri~6'- 1972,- '
- ~~
~\" ~
President of the District Board of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District of
Contra Costa County, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
ç-; - (\1 - -
L, f-- L~l-\Js
Secretary of the District Board of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District of
Contra Costa County, State of California
04
21
72