HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 10-21-93
~ Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
~ BOARD OF DIRECTORS
..--.................'..........................,..,-'.............-_....._..._..........'.'...',...
PO~lmIINRAeER BOARD MEETING OF
PAGE 1 OF 1
October 21, 1993
NO.
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR d.
SUBJECT
DATE
ESTABLISH NOVEMBER 18, 1993, AT 3:00 P.M. AS
THE DATE AND TIME FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON
ANNEXATION 125 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY
FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO)
October 1 2 1993
TYPE ACTION
SET PUBLIC
HEARING
SlJEWITTED.BY H II
uennls a
Associate Engineer
INITIATING DEPTJDI~ngineering Department
Infrastructure Division
ISSUE: LAFCO has added one property to one of the original ten parcels which comprise
District Annexation 125. A public hearing must be held before this District can order the
annexation of this amended parcel.
BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFCO as required for the
formal annexation process. LAFCO has amended the boundaries of one of the parcels as
submitted by the District. The amended parcel is designated as D.A. 125, Parcels 3. As
required by law, staff will notify all affected property owners 15 days prior to the public
hearing.
RECOMMENDATION: Establish a public hearing date on November 18, 1993, at 3:00 p.m. for
the annexation of the above-referenced Parcel 3 as amended by LAFCO.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
,or
w
Pf3
INITIATING DEPTJDIV.
1302A-7/91
DH
JSM
RAB
.
Central Contra Costa Sanitary lJistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF
POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OFOctober 21,1993
NO.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR e.
DATE October 13, 1993
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE MEDICAL LEAVE WITHOUT PAY FOR
DENNIS ALMOND, MAINTENANCE CREW MEMBER II,
THROUGH NOVEMBER 15, 1993
TYPE OF ACTION
PERSONNEL
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
John A. Larson
Collection S
ISSUE: Board authorization is required for Leave Without Pay in excess of 30 days.
BACKGROUND: Dennis Almond, Maintenance Crew Member II, has been off work since April 22,
1993, due to a non-industrial injury. Mr. Almond was granted continuing Medical Leave Without
Pay by the Board at its June 17, 1993 and September 2, 1993 meetings. Mr. Almond needs
additional time, through November 15, 1993, in order to resolve his situation.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Medical Leave Without Pay for Dennis Almond, Maintenance
Crew Member II, through November 15, 1993.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
~
JAL
CRF
PAGE 1 OF 11
BOARD MEETING OF
SUBJlRI ALUA TE BID BY RANGER PIPELINE INCORPORATED
TO CONSTRUCT THE PLEASANT HILL RELIEF
INTERCEPTOR, DP 4879, CONSIDER AWARD TO LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BID, AUTHORIZE RECYCLED WATER
PIPELINE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION
OF CONSULTING AGREEMENTS
NO.
6. BIDS AND AWARDS a.
DATOctober 19, 1993
~~Al.t1J{'l: BIDS
EVALUATE PROTEST
AUTHORIZE AWARD
AUTHORIZE PROJECT SIZE
SUBMITIED BY
INITIATING DEPT JDIV.
Tad J. Pilecki, Senior Engineer
Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Div.
ISSUE: On October 5, 1993, sealed bids for the construction of District Project No. 4879,
Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project, Phases 1 and 2 were opened. A bid protest has been
received. The Board of Directors must evaluate the merits of the protest. The Board must
authorize award of the contract or reject all bids within 80 days of the opening of bids.
Separately, authorization by the Board is required to proceed with the Recycled Water Pipeline
Project and to execute consulting agreements for amounts greater than $50,000. Board
authorization is also required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an amendment
to a utility agreement with the Contra Costa Water District.
BACKGROUND: On September 4, 1991, the Board passed a resolution certifying the Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project. The Board
also passed a resolution approving the majority of the project alignment. At its July 1, 1993,
meeting, the Board approved the alignment of the last section of Phases 1 and 2 (the Contra
Costa Boulevard tunnel) and also approved upsizing the line in Marsh Drive to accommodate
the future A-Line Relief Interceptor. At its September 16, 1993 meeting, the Board approved
a Negative Declaration and the Recycled Water Pipeline Project.
Phase 1 and 2 of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project includes construction of 5,750 feet
of 1 02-inch diameter pipe, 520 feet of 11 foot by 19 foot reinforced concrete box sewers, two
major highway tunnel crossings (78- and 54-inches), an 1,150 foot tunnel (54-inch pipe) in
Contra Costa Boulevard, eight major junction structures, 9,200 feet of 18-inch or 24-inch
Recycled Water Pipeline and miscellaneous piping at the treatment plant headworks.
Construction of the project includes crossing Buchanan Fields Golf Course, diversion of Grayson
Creek during construction, construction within the Buchanan Fields Airport restricted zones, and
constructing through contaminated materials adjacent to the UNOCAL property at Contra Costa
Boulevard and Chilpancingo. Virtually all the necessary permits, agreements, and regulatory
requirements for the project have been obtained or met, including all the construction access
and right-of-way documents. Several minor easements for the Recycled Water Pipeline are still
in the process of being acquired, however the contract documents are structured to address
any difficulties that may occur in the acquisition process.
Plans and specifications for the project were prepared by Montgomery Watson (MW); the
Engineers Estimate for the construction was $18,300,000. This number was adjusted by staff
INITIATING DEPTJDIV.
TJ
\
K~ IIJ-
RE WE WED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACDON
1302A-7/91
SUBJECT
EVALUATE BID BY RANGER PIPELINE INCORPORATED
TO CONSTRUCT THE PLEASANT HILL RELIEF
INTERCEPTOR, DP 4879, CONSIDER AWARD TO LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BID, AUTHORIZE RECYCLED WATER
PIPELINE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION
nc: II Tlfl.lr::: A . 'TC:
............................................................~..,...................
111111111::11111111
PAGE
DATE
2
OF
11
October 19, 1993
to $14,000,000 to reflect the current bid climate. The project was advertised on August 23
and Aug"ust 30, 1993, Eight (8) bids ranging from $14,168,948 to $22,291,128 were received
and publicly opened on October 5, 1993. A summary of bids is presented in Attachment 1.
The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial evaluation of bids. It was
found that the experience information submitted by Ranger Pipeline Incorporated (Ranger) as
well as that from the next two bidders did not appear to fully comply with a literal reading of
certain experiencial criteria set forth in the Proposal Forms. A bid protest letter from Contri
Construction Company (Contri) was received on October 7, 1993, claiming that Ranger's bid
was nonresponsive in that Ranger did not meet the experience criteria set forth in the Contract
Documents (Attachment 2).
Ranger, the apparent low bidder, has met with staff and has provided additional information
regarding the firm's experience and qualifications to do the work. After substantive discussions
with Ranger's key personnel concerning Ranger's experience and qualifications, staff is satisfied
that Ranger's key personnel assigned to the Pleasant Hill project have the experience and
qualifications necessary to successfully complete the project. Ranger's bonding company
(Casey and Company) and the pipe supplier (AMERON) have both written statements indicating
that Ranger has the experience, qualifications and financial wherewithal necessary to construct
the project, Additionally, Ranger owns several specialized pieces of equipment ideally suited
for a project of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor magnitude.
Staff has evaluated the remaining bids and determined that both the second and third low
bidders also appear to be at variance with a literal reading of certain experiencial criteria set
forth in the Proposal Forms.
The Project Contract Document allows the Board to evaluate the information provided in
determining whether to award the contract to the apparent low bidder. In evaluating all the
information supplied by Ranger, staff has concluded that Ranger appears potentially able to do
the work and therefore minimally meets the intent of the experience criteria set forth in the
Request for Bids. Staff has also carefully evaluated the protest from Contri and concludes that
the protest should be denied based on staff's evaluation of Ranger, As always, the Board does
have the option to reject all bids. (This alternative is not recommended, however.)
Staff plans to review the essential issues with the Board in a presentation at the Board meeting.
Staff recommends that the Board also receive information from potentially affected bidders and
other interested parties. The four lowest bidders have been informed of this evaluation and
award process and of staff's recommendation.
1302B-7/91
EVALUATE BID BY RANGER PIPELINE INCORPORATED
TO CONSTRUCT THE PLEASANT HILL RELIEF
INTERCEPTOR, DP 4879, CONSIDER AWARD TO LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BID, AUTHORIZE RECYCLED WATER
PIPELINE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION
"--'-"IITII\Ir:: A
.....111.'1'.11......11.1.11.....
SUBJECT
PAGE
DATE
3
OF
11
October 1 9, 1 993
As part of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project bid, bids were received for construction
of the Recycled Water Pipeline. Two Recycled Water Pipeline options were bid. One option
consisted of all 18-inch line and the other had approximately 6,000 feet of 18-inch line upsized
to 24-inch; Ranger's bid had $970,048 for the 18-inch option and an additional $140,293 for
upsizing a portion of the line to 24-inches. Staff is evaluating the cost effectiveness and
operational impacts of upsizing the recycled water pipeline. Also, discussions are continuing
with Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) regarding their participation in this project. Staff
recommends that the Board preliminarily approve the 24-inch line size, subject to ratification
at a future Board meeting when staff will present additional information.
District staff will administer the construction contract and provide inspection services. Resident
engineering and office engineering services, including shop drawing review will be provided by
MW. MW prepared the plans and specifications for the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project
and has provided resident engineering services for previous District construction projects.
Because of previous satisfactory performance and knowledge of the project, MW was selected
to provide resident engineering and office engineering for the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor
Project. A combination lump sum and hourly rate contract for $466,500 has been negotiated
with MW. Periodic inspection services and office engineering associated with the tunnel
portions of the project will be provided by Woodward Clyde Construction (WCC). WCC
prepared the plans and specifications for the tunnel portions of the Pleasant Hill Relief
Interceptor Project. Because of previous satisfactory performance and knowledge of the
project, WCC was selected to provide periodic field inspection and office engineering for the
tunnel portions of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project. A cost reimbursement agreement
has been negotiated with WCC with a cost ceiling of $102,500.
A detailed review of the final design plans has identified 150 feet of 8-inch water main that is
in conflict with the interceptor. Staff proposes to amend an existing utilities agreement with
Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) approved by the Board for the Pleasant Hill Project at its
January 21, 1993 Board meeting to relocate this line. CCWD will prepare the plans and provide
construction inspection, and the Sanitary District's contractor will perform the work. CCWD
has estimated the cost for design and construction inspection for the 8-inch water main
relocation to be $10,000. The construction cost of the relocation is $12,000.
The Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project is included in the 1993-94 CIB at pages CS-11-15,
CS-21-24, and TP 127-130. A post bid preconstruction estimate is presented in Attachment
3. An allocation of $17,328,000 from the Collection System Program by the General Manager-
Chief Engineer is needed to complete the project. The current balance of the Sewer
Construction fund, minus unspent authorizations, plus projected dependable revenue will be
adequate to fund this project. A funding summary is presented in Attachment 4.
1302B-7/91
SU~~ALUA TE BID BY RANGER PIPELINE INCORPORATED
TO CONSTRUCT THE PLEASANT HILL RELIEF
INTERCEPTOR, DP 4879, CONSIDER AWARD TO LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BID, AUTHORIZE RECYCLED WATER
PIPELINE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION
OF CONSULTING AGREEMENTS
......................................................... .........-.............
...............................................................-...................
oRIIIIIIIIIII&m
PAGE
DATE
4
OF
11
October 19, 1993
CEQA requirements for this project have been met by the Board's approval of the Final EIR for
the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project at its September 4, 1991, and July 1, 1993, meetings
and the approval of the Negative Declaration for the Recycled Water Pipeline at its September
16, 1993, meeting. The Final EIR requires the District to implement a Mitigation, Monitoring
and Reporting Program. Staff has included sufficient funds to assure that the Mitigation,
Monitoring and Reporting Program is adequately carried out.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Evaluate the bid submitted by Ranger Pipelines Incorporated.
2. Deny Contri Construction Company's bid Protest.
3. Authorize award of contract in the amount of $ 14,168,948 to Ranger Pipeline, Inc. as
the lowest responsible bidder submitting a responsive bid.
4. Authorize staff to proceed with the 24-inch option for the Recycled Water Pipeline,
subject to ratification at a future Board meeting.
5. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute consulting agreements with
Montgomery Watson ($466,500) and Woodward Clyde Consultants ($102,500),
6. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an amendment to an existing
agreement with Contra Costa Water District for the relocation of an 8-inch water main.
13028-7/91
Central C-ontra Costa Sanita~v District
SUMMARV OF BID& ATTACHMENT 1
PROJECT NO. 4879 -Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor DATE Or.tohpr !1. lqq~
LOCATION Martinez/Pleasant Hill ENGR. EST. $ 14,Onn,OOO
-
~.!7
BIDDER (Nome, telephone & address)
BIC PRle.
1 RANGER PIPELINES. INC (415 ) 822-3700 ~ 14.168.948.00
P. O. Box 24109, San Francisco, CA 94124
~ ., .-
j
2 CONTRI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (702 ) 786-8552 ~ 14,657,639.00
P. O. Box 12100, Reno, NV 89502
>--
3 STACY AND WITBECK (415 ) 285-7570 ~ 15,081,695.00
P. O. Box 883063, San Francisco~ 'CA 94188
- .
4 COLI CH AND SONS (213 ) 770-2920 ~ 15.879.p21.00
547 West 140th St., Gardena, CA 90248
-
HDMER, J;'::~.:Ol5Ef.I. (510 ) 489-1661 ~16.713.165.~0
5 94587
P. O. Box 993, Union City, CA
-
C. R. FEDRICK (415 ) 892-0848 ~ 16,785,988.90
6
320 Deer Island lane, Novato, CA 94948
MOUNtAIN CASCADE -' . { 510') 373-8370- - $"17,949,566.00
7 . .
. P. 0.. Bo);{ 5050, Livermore, 'CA . 94550
.
0- .
BRH.- 'GARVER o. (713 ) 921-2929 . ~:22.291.128.000
8 .
54Q2 Lawndale, Houston, IX . 77023
, ( ) $
>--
( ) $
( ) $ .'
~
( ) $
BIOS OPENED BY (Signed) Joyce Murphy
DATE 10/5/93
SHEET NO.
OF
250~1l:'4
ATI.l\CHMENT 2
Contri Construction Company
P.O. BOX 12100/RENO, NEVADA 89510
(702) 786-8550 . FAX (702) 786-9829
CCCSDINFRASTRUCTURE
October 7, 1993
via Fax (510) 228-4624 & certified Mail
(Return Receipt Requested)
Mr. Tad J. Pilecki, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Infrastructure Division
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553-4392
Re: Bid Protest
Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor
Sewer Phases 1&2
District Project No. 4879
Dear Mr. pilecki:
We are hereby protesting the bid of Ranger Pipeline, Inc. on
the above-referenced project for which bids were opened October 5,
1993 at 2:00 p.m.
The basis of this protest is that Ranger
Pipeline, Inc. did not submit a bid that conforms with the
requirements of the contract documents.
Your attention is directed to Contract Document DP #4879-Part
111-20 wherein it states:
Work described will be for separate j obs involving 10,000
feet of sewer pipe, about 5,000 feet of which is 72 inch
diameter or larger with contract amounts of $5 million.
A listing of three jobs is preferable. All experience
listed shall have occurred in the last five (5) years.
Failure to complete this section as required, may result
in the bid being rejected as nonresponsive.
Contri Construction Company
Mr. Tad J. Pilecki, P.E.
Senior Engineer - Infrastructure Division
October 7, 1993
Page 2
None of the jobs listed by Ranger Pipeline, Inc. involve
laying of pipe in excess of 24 inches in diameter. since none of
the jobs listed by Ranger Pipeline, Inc. involve jobs with a 72
inch diameter pipe or larger, Ranger Pipeline, Inc.' s bid is
nonresponsive and must be rejected.
Also, Ranger Pipeline, Inc.'s bid reveals that Ranger is a
nonresponsible bidder. At Contract Document DP #4879 Part III-19
section 5 [Bidder's Statement of Financial Responsibility,
Technical Ability and Experience], Ranger claims to have
"Experience in work of a nature similar in type and magnitude to
that set forth in the Contract Documents [which] extends over a
period of 10 years."
However, Ranger's listing of its job
experience clearly demonstrates that Ranger lacks any experience in
work of a nature similar in type and magnitude set forth in the
contract documents.
Furthermore, Ranger's Statement of Financial Responsibility
only lists its bonding company as a reference.
Contri respectfully submits that Ranger's lack of proper work
experience and skimpy financial data render Ranger a non-
responsible bidder. Thus, it is in the District's best interest
not to accept Ranger's bid.
For the foregoing reasons we respectfully request that the bid
of Ranger Pipeline, Inc. be declared nonresponsive and non-
Contri Construction Company
Mr. Tad J. Pilecki, P.E.
Senior Engineer - Infrastructure Division
October 7, 1993
Page 3
responsible and that the bid of contri Construction Company be
accepted as the low bid.
We also request that you immediately provide us with all
replies and responses to contri' s bid protest and all
recommendations and decisions of the Central Contra Costa County
sanitary District or its representatives in connection with the
protest. We further request that we be given an opportunity to
respond to any such replies, responses, recommendations or
decisions.
rrs vefltrulY.'
~~
Ted contri
President
cc: Richard A. Bunn, Esq.
ATTACHMENT 3
PLEASANT HILL RELIEF INTERCEPTOR, PHASE 1 and 2
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4879
POST-BID/PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
l1im DescriDtion nnm
1. Interceptor Construction Contract 13,198,900
Recycled Water Pipeline (24-inch) 1,110,341
PG&E Relocation 60,000
CCWD (Relocation of water line) 10,000
Boom Truck 1 95.000
14,474,241
2. Contingency @ 10% 1 .446.759
Subtotal 15,921,000
3. Construction Management
. Project Management 66,000
. Inspection/Administration 325,000
. Survey 90,000
. Design Support 1 5 .000
Subtotal 496,000
4. Consultant Contracts
. Design Consultant (MW) 226,500
. Soils/Tunnel Consultant (WCC) 102,500
. Construction Resident Engineer (MW) 240,000
. Preconstruction Damage Assessment 40,000
. Material Testing 35,000
. MMRP Review Consultant 25,000
. Arborist 5,000
. Corrosion Consultant 5,000
. Traffic Consultant 1 0.000
Subtotal 689,000
Percent of
Estimated
Construction
Cost
100
3.1
4.3
1 Required to remove/replace diversion gates in the interceptor. Will be purchased
separately from the construction contract.
Percent of
Estimated
Construction
Item DescriDtion ImI! em
5. Miscellaneous
. Construction Security Guard 25,000
. Legal 30,000
. Disputes Review Board 30,000
. Permit/City Inspection 44,000
. Santa Fe Pipeline Inspection 3,000
. Collection System Operations 1 0,000
. Community Relations 57,000
. Record Drawings (by District staff) 15,000
. Computer Equipment 5,000
. Field Office Support 3.000
Subtotal 222,000 1.4
6. Prebid Expenditures
. Predesign2 450,000 2.8
. Final Design Phase 1 &2 1 .300.000 8.2
Subtotal 1,750,000 11.0
7. Total Project Cost Estimate 19,078,000 119.8
8. Funds Authorized to Date 1,750,000
9. Total Allocation of Funds to Complete Project 17 .328.000
2 Includes predesign expenditures for the A-Line Relief Interceptor and phases of the
Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor that are being built under this project.
ID/A:DP4879/PoItBid.3
ATTACHMENT 4
PROJECT FUNDING SUMMARY
FOR THE PERIOD
10/7/93 - 11/6/93
SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND BALANCE
AS OF 9/30/93
55,273,316
MINUS UNSPENT PRIOR ALLOCATIONS
(33,121,990)
PLUS DEPENDABLE CURRENT YEAR REVENUE
22,221,448
9,018,500
53,391,274
PLUS DEPENDABLE FUTURE REVENUE
53,391,274 > 17 ,328,000 (ALLOCATION REQUIRED)
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1
OF 3
BOARD MEETING OF
October 21, 1 993
NO.
7. SOLID WASTE a.
DETERMINATION OF BREACH AND ASSIGNMENT OF
GARBAGE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
DATE
October 18 1993
TYPE OF ACTION
SUBJECT
SOLID WASTE
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager
Administrative/Solid Waste
ISSUE: There has been a request for assignment of franchise; ownership of the Pleasant Hill
Bayshore Disposal Company franchise has been transferred to Browning Ferris Industries, Inc.
in apparent violation of the terms of the District franchise contract.
BACKGROUND: In 1986 the District entered into a Franchise Agreement entitled" Agreement
for Collection, Removal, and Disposal of Garbage - Zone 3" with Pleasant Hill Bayshore
Disposal, a sole proprietorship, to provide exclusive solid waste collection disposal services.
The Franchise Agreement states in part that:
"in the event that the contractor herein attempts to assign or subcontract this
Agreement or any part hereof or any obligation hereunder, the District shall have
the right to ~ (emphasis added) to terminate forthwith, without suit or other
proceeding. "
The question before the Board is whether Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, a sole proprietorship,
has breached that provision of the Franchise Agreement and what action, if any, should be
taken by the District at this time. '
G
On or about March 29, 1990, Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc., subsidiary of Browning
Ferris Industries, Inc. (BF!), reportedly acquired substantially all of the operating assets of
Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, a sole proprietorship. Subsequent to the referenced
acquisition, Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. purported to lease to Boyd M. Olney, Jr., dba
Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, among other things, equipment and personnel necessary to
perform the activities required by the District's Franchised Agreement. The lease agreement,
in the opinion of the General Manager-Chief Engineer, the Solid Waste staff, and District
counsel (Staff), constitutes breach of the above-noted franchise provision and could be cause
for termination of the Zone 3 Franchise.
The Franchise Agreement, to which Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal is a party and to which
Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. (the BFI subsidiary) desires to become a party, required
that any assignment of the Agreement can be made. only with the written consent of the
District. The issue concerning this acquisition and lease arose after Pleasant Hill Bayshore
Disposal had, on March 7, 1990, requested the consent of this Board for the assignment of the
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
PM
KLA
SUBJECT
DETERMINATION OF BREACH AND ASSIGNMENT OF
GARBAGE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
PAGE
DATE
2
OF
3
October 18, 1993
referenced franchise to Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. Promptly after receipt of the
notice regarding the intent to assign, the District requested certain information from Pleasant
Hill Bayshore Disposal, much in the same manner that the District had requested information
concerning the proposed assignments of Valley Disposal and Orinda-Moraga Disposal.
However, the completion of the acquisition and the lease were executed prior to the provision
of the information requested by the District and prior to the District taking action on the
proposed assignment of the franchise. No action has been taken by the District since that date
to approve the assignment, or ratify the actions of Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal or Pleasant
Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. with regard to the purchase and/or lease agreements.
Since that time there have been several contacts with Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, sole
proprietorship, and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. (a BFI subsidiary) with regard to a
number of matters related to the status of the franchise and the potential for a continued
business relationship. No specific resolution of this matter has been agreed upon by District
staff and the hauler. While staff believed that it had the authority to terminate the franchise
and bring the matter to the Board, a number of circumstances existed which led staff to refrain
from taking action with regard to this breach of the Franchise Agreement. These factors are:
(1) the efforts of the County to take over all franchises in the unincorporated areas; (2) the
ongoing consideration of the future of CCCSD, as a franchisor, in the solid waste arena; (3) the
expiration of the current garbage franchise in 1996; (4) the apparent preference of the Pacheco
Town Council (speaking on t?ehalf of Pacheco residents) to retain the District as their
franchisor; and (5) the apparent lack of dissatisfaction of customers in the Zone 3 Franchise
area, as determined through past customer satisfaction surveys, with Pleasant Hill Bayshore
Disposal.
Although a number of the reasons for the delay in reaching a closure on this issue continue to
. exist, staff has concluded that the matter should be brought to resolution so that this issue
does not interfere with the planning activities of the District regarding its future role in Central
County solid waste activities. Staff has concluded, as noted above, that indeed a breach
occurred sufficient to cause termination of the existing Franchise Agreement. However, staff
recommends that the Agreement not be terminated at this time due to the short time period
left under this franchise and the potential for an adverse impact on the solid waste customers
within Zone 3 if a transfer of franchise activities were to occur now and potentially again in
1996. Staff concludes that it is in the best interests of the rate payers that the Board make
a finding that the Agreement has been breached. The Board should then find that the District
will not terminate the franchise at this time, but that the District does not waive its right to
exercise this termination provision in the future if appropriate conditions are not met. Further,
staff feels the Board should consider the issue of assignment of the franchise and subsequently
grant the assignment of the franchise to Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. (a subsidiary of
1302B-7/91 _
SUBJECT
DETERMINATION OF BREACH AND ASSIGNMENT OF
GARBAGE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
PAGE
DATE
3
OF
3
October 18, 1993
BF!) so that the current contractual relationship is amended to reflect the existing
circumstances in fact.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 . Consider the circumstances concerning the purported assignment of the franchise and
make a finding that a breach of the Franchise Agreement by the franchisee has occurred.
2. Determine that the District will not exercise its authority to terminate the franchise at
this time, but will suspend such action conditioned upon the provision of acceptable
service to the customers and compliance with all terms and conditions of the franchise
during the remaining term of the Franchise Agreement.
3. Determine that the District does not by these actions waive its rights under the terms
of the Franchise Agreement to terminate the franchise.
4. Authorize staff to execute an assignment agreement setting forth the assignment from
Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, a sole proprietorship, to Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal,
Inc. (a wholly owned BFI subsidiary), conditioned upon the provision of acceptable
service to the customers and compliance with all terms and conditions of the franchise
during the remaining term of the Franchise Agreement.
13026-7/91
PAGE 1 OF 10
NO.
8. ADMINISTRATIVE a.
SUBJECT DATE
RECEIVE THE 1992-1993 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DEFERRED
COMPENSATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TYPE OF ACTION
RECEIVE ANNUAL
REPORT
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPTJDIV.
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller
Administrative/Finance and Accounting
ISSUE: The Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee (Committee) respectfully
submits its 1992-1993 annual report to the Board of Directors and Plan participants.
BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors approved the establishment of the Committee in
January 1982. The scope of activities of the Committee includes submission of an annual
report to the Board of Directors and Plan participants.
The Committee made several major accomplishments this year; among the most important
are:
. Added a third provider, International City Management Association Retirement
Corporation
. Developed a benefit fact sheet for Plan participants
. Updated the Deferred Compensation Plan Handbook
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the annual report of the Deferred Compensation Plan
Advisory Committee for 1992-1993.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT
JULY 1992 - JUNE 1993
The Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee (the Committee) was established
by the Board of Directors to facilitate the internal administration of the District' Deferred
Compensation Plan. The scope of the Committee's activities encompass the following:
. Establish internal District administrative procedures within the provisions of the
Deferred Compensation Plan document.
. Educate participants regarding the Plan provisions by issuing a handbook which
summarizes the Deferred Compensation Plan and responding to questions from
participants.
. Review accountability by the Program Administrators, Hartford Life Insurance
Company (Hartford) and Great Western Bank (Great Western), and respond to
participants' queries regarding accuracy or propriety of account balances.
. Review participants' requests for emergency withdrawal of funds.
. Review investment performance of the Deferred Compensation Plan on an annual
basis.
Committee Accomplishments
The following activities were completed by the Committee during July 1992 through June
1993:
. Internal District Administrative Procedures
The Committee reviewed six proposals from other deferred compensation providers
and concluded that ICMA Retirement Corporation was the best of the proposals
submitted. It was recommended that ICMA be added as a third provider and
approved by the Board in August.
The Committee researched the issue of a potential overwithdrawal during an
emergency withdrawal. New procedures were implemented to prevent this
potential problem.
The Committee also researched the issue of divorce settlements and their effect
on the Plan. A separate account can be set up in the ex-spouse's name, but
cannot be withdrawn until the working spouse separates from the District.
1
. Education of Particioants
An updated Deferred Compensation Plan Handbook was submitted for printing but
was tabled awaiting Board approval of a third provider.
Representatives from Hartford and Great Western were available on-site on a
designated day each month to assist participants by providing information and
responding to questions. For the new Plan year, these meetings have been
scheduled quarterly, the month prior to open enrollment.
Additional meetings with the deferred compensation representatives were made
available for those employees considering accepting the early retirement offer.
The Committee developed a fact sheet for the benefit of the Plan participants that
outlined investment options, fees, and charges for both existing providers and the
proposed third provider.
. Review Accountabilitv bv ProQram Administrators
In June 1993, the District was notified that Great Western Bank was exercising
its right to terminate the existing contract without cause. A revised contract was
negotiated in September 1993. The provisions of this contract were less favorable
than the previous contract, particularly in the area of savings account rates and
fees.
Monthly confirmation statements and quarterly account statements were submitted
to the District by Hartford and Great Western. Quarterly account statements were
distributed to all participants. The Committee discussed a revised, improved
format for the Great Western statements and received a commitment for the new
Plan year.
. Review- ReQuests for EmerQencv Withdrawals of Funds
Two emergency withdrawal requests were reviewed by the Committee, and one
was recommended for approval by the Board of Directors.
. Review Investment Performance
A summary which presents the investment performance of the Hartford and Great
Western programs for the calendar year 1992, and the first six months of 1993
is provided on Attachment 1.
2
Current Committee Activities
. The District's Deferred Compensation Plan document is undergoing a detailed
review by the Committee to ensure conformance with the current governing tax
codes and to improve accuracy and completeness.
. The Committee is coordinating the addition of a third provider.
. The existing Hartford contract will be reviewed and compared to anew, proposed
Hartford contract to determine any benefits to the District.
. The Committee is developing a new format for the Deferred Compensation Annual
Report.
Conclusion
During the period July 1992 through June 1933, the Committee addressed all of the
activities included in its scope of responsibilities through the conscientious efforts of all
of the Committee members.
The performance of Hartford and Great Western in administering the Deferred
Compensation Plan during the 1992-1993 report period is considered to be satisfactory.
The performance results of the Hartford and Great Western stock and bond investments
for the calendar year 1992 and the first six months of 1993, as shown on Attachments
1, 2, and 3, are as follows:
Hartford
The gain on the stock and bond accounts for the 1992 calendar year of 10.0
percent and 5.5 percent, respectively, exceeded the general market indices, as
measured by the Dow Jones Industrials and the Standard & Poors 500, which
registered gains of 4.1 percent and 4.4 percent, respectively; the bond account
underperformed the Lehman Brothers Bond Index which gained 8.7 percent.
Through the first six months ended June 30, 1993, the 4.5 percent gain on the
stock account outperformed the Standard & Poors 500 which gained 3.4 percent
and underperformed the Dow Jones Industrial which gained 6.5 percent; the gain
of 7.1 percent on the bond account underperformed the Lehman Brothers Bond
Index, which gained 12.4 percent.
Great Western
For the 1992 calendar year, seven of the twelve stock accounts (Investment
Company of America 7.0 percent; Growth Fund of America, 7.4 percent; Income
Fund of America, 12.0 percent; Fidelity Retirement Growth Fund, 10.4 percent;
Fidelity Magellan Fund, 6.8 percent; Fidelity Equity Income Fund, 14.6 percent;
3
and Fidelity Puritan Fund, 15.4 percent) exceeded the Dow Jones Industrials and
Standard & Poors indices; five of the twelve stock accounts (Twentieth Century
Growth Fund, -4.3 percent; Fidelity Overseas Fund, -11.4 percent; Twentieth
Century Select Fund, -4.4 percent; Twentieth Century Ultra Fund, 1.3 percent; and
Twentieth Century Balanced Fund, -6.1 percent) underperformed the general
market indices. The Bond Fund of America gained 11.3 percent, which exceeded
the Lehman Brothers Bond Index.
Through the first six months ended June 30, 1993, eight of the twelve stock
accounts (Fidelity Retirement Growth Fund, 8.0 percent; Fidelity Magellan Fund,
15.5 percent; Fidelity Equity Income Fund, 12.0 percent; Fidelity Puritan Fund,
13.4 percent; Fidelity Overseas Fund, 19.8 percent; Twentieth Century Select
Fund, 9.6 percent; Twentieth Century Ultra Fund, 13.9 percent; and Income Fund
of America, 8.8 percent) exceeded the Dow Jones Industrials and Standard &
Poors indices; three stock accounts (Investment Company of America, 4.6 percent;
Growth Fund of America, 3.9 percent; and Twentieth Century Balanced Fund, 3.6
percent) exceeded the Standard & Poors 500 only; the Twentieth Century Growth
Fund loss of -2.2 percent underperformed both market indices; and the Bond Fund
of America gain of 9.4 percent underperformed the 12.4 percent gain registered
by the Lehman Brothers Bond Index.
Committee Members:
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller
Nadine Schumacker, Administrative Department
Tad Pilecki, Engineering Department
Tanya Butler, Collection System Operations Department
Phil Snyder, Plant Operations Department
ADS/Def Comp/Annual.rpt
4
LEGEND:
20th Century Funds:
20th C. BF
20th C. GF
20th C. SF
20th C. UF
Fidelity Funds:
Fidelity ElF
Fidelity MF
Fidelity OF
Fidelity PF
Fidelity RG
American Funds:
G.W. GFA
G.W. ICA
G.W. IFA
G.W. BFA
Market Indices:
Dow Jones
S&P500
L.B.Bondlndex
Balanced
Growth
Select
Ultra
Equity Income .
Magellan
Overseas
Puritan
Retirement Growth
Growth Fund
Investment Company
Income Fund
Bond Fund
Dow Jones 30 Industrials
S&P500
Lehman Brothers
5
~
<st-
an
(st
CD
0) 0) ------------------------------ (st
u u ~
e e
ca (st as
E an E
... ...
0 0
'I- 'I- ~ X
... "'('1) w
0) 0)0) (st 0
0.. (stZ 0..0) C")z z
~a: ,.. a: ~
0~ ::::> o ...
1Li ::::> w
OlC\I OlO 1Li ~
a:
CO) a: e('l) a: <(
LL
-- 0) 0 -- Q) LL ~
>,.. w >c 0
ca.... ~~ as::S w
enca en' ~
CD o.~
a.> ~
E~ E:a
0-0 OC
oi o~
- -0:5
-oca
0)0 o)c
............ ...0
... "':E
0) ~><
'I-
0) 0) .-
c ce
c c
CJ) en
0 0
0 0
0 - .- _ "E 0
- -
.- .-
EO C Q - _ "E
c 0 in c Q
~ 0 .:; :e . 0 c 0
t- .- :e
>- ~ ca ca >
co en :r: >- :: ca ca
C c; ca en :r:
~ :: c c; ::
c; 0
Q) c;
6
CD
(.)
c
ca
E
....
o
III-
....
CD
D.
0.-.
~N
(.)<>>
O~
....r-
UJca
Q.CD
Et
OCD
O-g
"'OJ!
CDca
....~
....
CD
III-
CD
C
C
UJ
o
o
o
--------------------------------------------- ~
------------------------------------------------------- ~
------------------------------------------------------------ ~
------------------------------------------------------------ ~
...
I
~
...
I
~ It u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. <C e" <C u.. u.. "
0 CD UJ e" :E 0 a: u.. - a. ..
c - e" - w 0
0 ~($ ($ ($ . ~~ ~~ ~~i
a. ~ 0 ~
~ ~ 'ii .c .c .c .c G) . G) d 'ii G) :x:
" ~ ~ ~ ~ " e" . " " :2
U) .- .- e" .- .- LL
C u.. u.. u.. u..
t:
...
~
...
~
...
~
...
t:
CJ)
w
t: u
o
z
~ ~ I-
~::> w
tli ~
~~ ~
o
w
~~ I
~
7
CD
()
c
m
E
...
o .
.....c;)
"'cn
CDcn
0.,...
00
~~
()CI)
oc
....::2
enJ
Q.~
E --
O-g
OW
-c1!
CD'"
...c
...0
CD:E
.....><
CD --
ce
c
en
o
o
o
~
fl-
co
...
t:
...
~
...
~ en
w
... ()
c
z
~~ I-
W
...::> ~
tu a:
<
fl-CI: ~
COLL
0
W I
t:~
fI-
..
~
~
------------------------------------------------------------ ~
~ !
o - -
a..., 00
~ ! .c .c
tn C ~ ~
u. u. u.
W a. ;:) ::5 0 ~
~:!o~~!
- G) .c - 'ii ca
~ ~ ~ ~ l! ::I:
II. - ~ II. II.
~ cr:
~ ~ a: !!:
~~:!~
-d-!d
CJ ._
II.
~
8
---------- ~ -------------------- ~
...
CD ... CD
(.) (.)
c: c:
as as
E E -------------------- ~
... ... ...
0 ~ 0(;"
...... ....en
... "'en
CD CD..... x
w
0.. z D.. .. . z c
-eN a: -c~ _____u___ 'it. a: z
::> co::>
tu ~
c:en C:CI) tu w
o~ 'it. a: ~
Oc a: a:
m... (DLL m::s LL <
0 0 ~
a.m w .., w
~ a.t>> r:~
E> E.5
0;& 0"C I
o"C ~ o.fi
c
-e.s! -eU)
CDea CDoC ~
"'0 .......
...c
... ......, CDo
CD
.... ....~
CD CD><
0 ~ Ow
C C......, ~
en UJ
0 0
0 0
0 ~ 0
= :f -e = <C -e
" ~ u..
c m " m 0
c :e
~ -
" ca " == ca
c d :I:
0 c d :I:
0
m m
ai ai
.J .J
9
~
...
~
...
~ Central ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~:,a~~ Jistrict
PAGE 1 OF 3
POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING Obctober 21, 1993
NO.
9. ENGINEERING a.
SUBJECT
APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
AND APPROVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL
PROPERTY WITH ELISE AND MICHAEL WOODS,
1 88 HALL DRIVE, ORINDA
DATE
October 15, 1993
TYPE OF ACTION
APPROVE
AGREEMENT
SUBMITTED Ed'ay S. McCoy
Infrastructure Division Manager
INITIATI~e~ng Department
Infrastructure Division
ISSUE: District staff has reached agreement with Elise J. and Michael L. Woods regarding
issues related to alleged damage to the Woods' home, encroachments on the District's
easement across the Woods' property, and repair of the District's sewer on the Woods'
property. Board approval of settlement documents is needed.
BACKGROUND: The preliminary design of the Hall Drive Sewer Renovation Project included
the evaluation of the existing sanitary sewer system. When the location of the existing sewer
was surveyed and plotted, it was determined that portions of a liner-type swimming pool, spa,
deck, patio, sidewalk and drainage pipes had been built over the District's easement at 188 Hall
Drive. The property at this address is owned by Elise and Michael Woods.
The preliminary design process also included the televising of the existing sewers in the vicinity
of Hall Drive. The television inspection identified two areas of the District's sewer across the
Woods' property where pipe was broken. The original proposal for the Hall Drive Sewer
Renovation Project was to abandon this existing sewer, thus eliminating the need to repair it.
The Hall Drive Sewer Renovation Project was subsequently divided into phases. The Woods
allege that the District's sewer caused damage to their property. The District's consultant has
prepared a report which disputes the allegation.
The District engaged Woodward Clyde Consultants, a geotechnical firm, to analyze the
allegations and determine the reason for the structural damage and movement. The Woodward
Clyde report concluded that any damage to the Woods' property was unrelated to the sewer.
The Woods have disputed that report's conclusion. District staff has reached agreement with
the Woods on these issues.
The resolution of most of the issues is the subject of a "Settlement Agreement and Release,"
which being the product of extensive negotiation, is more complex and detailed than standard
releases. The central provisions of this release include 1) the Woods providing a full release
of the District for claims related to the alleged damage to the Woods' property, 2) the District
paying the Woods $19,000, 3) the District removing existing concrete patio, deck and
sidewalk in the area of the District's sewer, and 4) the District repairing the existing sewer.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
KLA
t:~
SUBJECT
POSITION PAPER
APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
AND APPROVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL
PROPERTY WITH ELISE AND MICHAEL WOODS,
188 HALL DRIVE, ORINDA
PAGE
DATE
?
OF
1
October 15, 1993
The resolution of the encroachments on the District's easement is the subject of an
"Agreement Related to Real Property." The central provisions of this agreement include 1)
allowing the existing liner-type swimming pool, spa, wood deck and drainage pipes to remain
over the easement, 2) establishing a requirement for District review of plans for future
improvements proposed for installation over the District's easement, 3) placing certain
responsibility on the Woods for future costs related to the location of the improvements over
the easement, 4) indemnification of the District, and 5) providing the District a right of access
for work on the sewer facilities.
The settlement which has been reached eliminates a potential claim for damages by the Woods
and provides protection for the District's facilities in the future. This settlement is reasonable
given the complexities of the issues related to the District's sewer on the Woods' property.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Directors:
· Approve a Settlement Agreement and Release with Elise J. and Michael Woods
concerning alleged damages to 188 Hall Drive.
· Approve an Agreement Related to Real Property with Elise J. and Michael Woods
concerning encroachments on the District's easement at 188 Hall Drive.
130?A q, fir;
I
._--~
V.C. PIPE
HOUSE
LOTS
SUB. 2131
M.L WOODS
188 HALL DRIVE
HALL
DRIVE
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary Dlstrtct
ELISE AND MICHAEL WOODS, 188 HALL DR.,ORINDA
2523-9/88
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 7
October 21, 1 993
NO.
13. BUDGET AND FINANCE a.
BOARD MEETING OF
SUBJECT
DATE
RECEIVE THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1993
TYPE OF ACTION
RECEIVE AUDITED
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller
Administrative/Finance and Accounting
ISSUE: The audited financial statements of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 1993 are being submitted to the Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND: The firm of Maze and Associates, Certified Public Accountants, has
completed its examination of the District's financial statements for the fiscal year ended June
30, 1993, and has submitted the audited financial statements and auditor's opinion thereon.
In the routine performance of their examination of the financial statements, the auditors
evaluate the District's internal accounting controls to determine the nature and extent of the
auditing procedures required. Based on their observations during the course of the
examination, the auditors routinely advise District management of any recommendations to
improve the system of internal accounting controls. As indicated in the management letter
provided as Attachment I, the auditors stated that District money over $100,000 held in an
Escrow Account must be held by a depository which is in compliance with pooled collateral
requirements on local government deposits, and the account must be set up as a Public
Deposit Account. Our current Escrow Account is now below $100,000 and is therefore
covered by FDIC. However, a memo has been sent to all project managers informing them of
the requirement to deposit escrow funds in a Public Deposit Account.
The District's investment policy requires a performance evaluation every four years by its
independent auditors to determine whether the investment objective of achieving a market-
average rate of return is being realized. The investment policy states that the average return
of three-month U.S. Treasury Bills will be used to determine the market-average rate of return.
Maze and Associates reviewed the investment performance for the year, and calculated the
District's average rate of return to be 4.88 percent compared to the market-average rate of
return of 2.99 percent as noted in the Independent Accountants Report, Attachment II. The
District was successful in meeting its investment objectives.
The audited financial statements were submitted in draft form to the Board's Budget and
Finance Committee for review.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended June
30, 1993.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
1302A-7/91
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS
IN INTERNAL CONTROL
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1993
REVIEW DRAFT
Monday, 10/18/93 - 4:42pm
Attachment I
Board of Directors and District Manager
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Martinez, California
We have audited the [mancial statements of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District for the year ended June
30,1993, and have issued ourreport thereon dated August 21,1993. As part of our audit, we made a study and
evaluation of the system of internal accounting control to the extent we considered necessary to evaluate the
system as required by generally accepted auditing standards. The purpose of our study and evaluation was to
determine the nature, timing, and extent of the auditing procedures necessary for expressing an opinion on the
[mancial statements. Our study and evaluation was more limited than would be necessary to express an opinion
on the system of internal accounting control taken as a whole.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of internal accounting control. In fulfilling
this responsibility, estimates and judgements by management are required to assess the expected benefits and
related costs of control procedures. The objectives of a system are to provide management with reasonable, but
not absolute assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that
transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Because of inherent limitations in any system of internal accounting control, errors or irregularities may
nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projections of any evaluation of the system to future periods is
subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree
of compliance with the procedures may deteriorate.
Our study and evaluation made for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph would not necessarily
disclose all material weaknesses in the system Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the system of
internal accounting control of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District taken as a whole. Our study and
evaluation disclosed no condition that we believe to be a material weakness.
REVIEW DRAFT
Monday, 10/18/93 - 4:42pm
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICf
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN INTERNAL CONTROL
Recommendation 1 - The District should not have cash deposits in institutions that do not provide the
required collateral.
As a public agency, the District is required by the California Government Code to deposit funds only in
authorized institutions which put up collateral exceeding the amounts of the deposits. As part of our 1993 audit,
we placed special emphasis on determining whether District deposits were with authorized institutions which
provided proper collateralization. As a result of this work, we noted the District maintains a deposit account with
Spring Mountain Escrow Company which had a balance of $289,543 at June 30, 1993. In response to our
confIrmation request and follow-up telephone inquiries, Spring Mountain stated the account was only insured
by the FDIC and that they do not carry any additional insurance or provide any collateralization for amounts
exceeding the FDIC insurance limit of $100,000.
Further follow-up with Spring Mountain by the District's Controller yielded the information that Spring
Mountain is an intermediary which maintains an account with a bank in its name as trustee for the District. The
bank, however, had not collateralized this account in excess of the FDIC insurance limit because the account was
not established as a public deposit account in the District's name. Spring Mountain also confIrmed again that
they provide no collateral over and above the FDIC insurance limit.
We have been informed that since the completion of our audit fIeldwork, the District's balance with Spring
Mountain has dropped below the FDIC limit. Nevertheless, the District should take steps to ensure that in the
future all District funds are deposited only in authorized institutions which provide FDIC insurance and the
collateral required by the California Government Code.
We have provided the District with the name and address of the State office responsible for determining that
institutions which accept deposits from California public agencies meet the collateral requirements of the
California Government Code. New accounts should be reviewed by an appropriate District official before they
are opened to determine they are established as a public deposit account with an authorized institution which
meets the collateral requirements noted above. In the case of intermediaries such as Spring Mountain, the District
should also ascertain that the fInal depository meets these requirements and that the District's name appears on
the account with that institution in such a way as to ensure that the District is adequately protected from loss
resulting from the failure of either the intermediary or the fInal depository.
REVIEW DRAFT
Monday, 10/18/93 - 4:42pm
Recommendation 1
Recommendation 2
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
STATUS OF PRIOR YEAR RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations
During our audit, we requested the Permit
Section to provide supporting detail for four
developer rebate balances for installed sewer
lines. These records are maintained in
manually posted form. The Section was
able to provide the detail requested, but
considerable extra work was required for
employees to analyze these four accounts.
The District should consider establishing a
PC - based computerized record system to
replace the manual records presently used.
Such a system should be inexpensive to
design and install and should pay for itself
out of Permit Section personnel time
savmgs.
Checks received by Finance and Accounting
are not restrictively endorsed until the
deposit is prepared, which may be three or
four days after receipt. We recommend
these checks be restrictively endorsed when
they are ftrst received, in order to reduce the
District's risk of loss with respect to such
checks.
***********
Status
Under consideration by
the District
Implemented
We would be pleased to discuss our recommendations with you at your convenience.
We also wish to express our appreciation for the excellent courtesy and cooperation extended to us by Debbie
Ratcliff and her statT during our audit.
August 23, 1993
REVIEW DRAFT
Monday, 10/18/93 - 4:42pm
"
"lvJ
. AZE&
ASSOCIA TES
Attachment I I
....
ACCOUNTANCY CORPORA nON
1670 Riviera Avenue -Suite 100
Walnut Creek, California 94596
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT (510) 930-0902. FAX 930-0135
Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
At your request we have applied the agreed-upon procedures below to the investment records of Central Contra
Costa Sanitary District for the year ended June 30, 1993. This report is solely for your information and is not to
be referred to or distributed for any purpose to anyone who is not a member of the management or Board of
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District.
Our procedures were as follows:
1. We confirmed the balance in the District's Local Agency Investment (LAIF) Account with LAIF and
with the County of Contra Costa at June 30,1993.
2. We confirmed balances in the District's other investment accounts with Bank of America, the custodian,
at June 30, 1993.
3. We selected fourteen investments for detail tests, including a sample of new investments and investments
which matured during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1993. Seven of these investments were selected from
the District's Schedule of Investments and traced to its General Ledger; seven were selected from the
General Ledger and traced to the Schedule of Investments.
4. All the investments selected at 3. above were determined to be properly authcrized by. a District
representative and to be in conformance with the District's investment policy, as revised January 12,
1993.
S. All the investments selected at 3. above were traced to the County's Investment Transaction Form or to
brokers' advice and confirmation forms. Descriptions, amounts, purchase and maturity dates and
interest rates on the Schedule of Investments were agreed with these source documents.
6. The proceeds from investments selected for tests which matured during the year ended June 30, 1993 were
traced to cash receipts recorded by the District or to reinvestments in new securities.
7. We computed the average of the interest rates listed for the District's investments on the Schedule of
Investments. Because of the homogeneous nature of the District's investment portfolio, we computed
a simple average of these rates, which equaled 4.88% for the year ended June 30, 1993.
8. We obtained rates of return for three-month Treasury Bills for the calendar quarters endedJune 30,1992,
September 30, 1992, March 31, 1993 and June 30, 1993 (December 31, 1992 was unavailable) and
determined that the average of these rates of return was 2.99%.
A Professional Corporation
~
.
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT (Continued)
Because the procedures noted above do not constitute an audit made in accordance with generally accepted
auditing standards, we do not express an opinion on any of the accounts or items referred to above. In connection
with the procedures referred to above, no matters came to our attention that caused us to believe that the specified
accounts or items should be adjusted.
Had we performed additional procedures, matters might have come to our attention that would have been
reported to you. This report relates only to the accounts and items specified above and does not extend to any
financial statements of Central C<lntra C<lsta Sani~ i 4~
October 13, 1993 r J