The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 04-06-89 . Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitar) Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 6 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Ap r i 1 6, 1989 NO. IV. HEARINGS 1 SUBJECT DATE CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE RECYCLING PROGRAM PROPOSED BY ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERV ICE, INC. AND DETERMINE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM April 3, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY INITIA T1NG DEPT.lDIV. Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager Administrative Department ISSUE: After receiving a presentation of the recycling plan proposed by Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. (Orinda-Moraga Disposal) for the communities of Orinda and Moraga on November 17, 1988, the Board of Directors determined that the plan should be calendared for consideration at a subsequent public hearing. BAa<GROUND: All cities within Contra Costa County are required by the County's Draft Revision of the Solid Waste Management Plan to implement recycling programs to reduce wastestream volume and thereby increase the life of in-county landfills. A general precondition of adjoining counties to accepting this county's exported solid waste is the existence of effective recycling programs in Contra Costa County. As the franchiser for refuse collection for four cities and three communities in the unincorporated areas of central county, the District has assumed a primary role in coordinating the development of recycling programs throughout its franchise areas. The franchise agreements between the District and its three franchised refuse collectors require submission of a recycling plan by the collectors upon request of the District. The District organized a Regional Recycling Advisory Committee to review alternative recycl ing programs for suitabil ity in each of the cities and unincorporated areas within the franchise areas. Members of the Committee include two District Board Members (Parke Boneysteele and Sue McNulty Rainey) and a representative from each of the cities and the unincorporated areas. Under the direction of the Committee, each of the three refuse collectors was directed to prepare proposals for recycling pl ans. The recycli ng pl an proposed by Ori nda-Moraga Di sposal was presented to the Board on November 17, 1988. A public hearing on the proposed recycling plan was to be schedul ed after detail s of the proposed pl an were presented to the affected cities of Orinda and Moraga. Presentations of the recycling plan were made to the Orinda City Council on December 13, 1988, and the Moraga Town Council on March 22, 1989, by Orinda-Moraga Disposal, District staff and Board liaison representatives. Written or oral comments from the cities were requested for Board consideration at a public hearing to be held on April 6, 1989. Notices of this public hearing were published on March 29,1989 and April 5, 1989 in the Contra Costa Sun, and on April 2, 1989 and April 5, 1989 in the Contra Costa Ii mes. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE RECYCLING PROGRAM PROPOSED BY ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. AND DETERMINE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM PAGE 2 OF 6 DATE April 3, 1989 Recycling Plan Proposed BY Orinda-Moraga Disposal Orinda-Moraga Disposal proposes a recycling plan which provides for curbside collection of the following recyclable items: aluminum cans; glass bottles; plastic beverage contai ners (P. E. T.); and newspapers. Each resi denti al customer woul d be provided a set of three plastic containers in which designated recyclable items would be placed. Collection of recyclable items would occur on the same day as the regular weekly refuse collection. Regular refuse collection service would be unaffected by the curbside recycling program. In their initial planning, Orinda-Moraga Disposal proposed the development of a temporary consol idation center which woul d serve as the facil ity for the receiving and processing of recyclable materials. On January 23, 1989, the Moraga Planning Commission granted Orinda-Moraga Disposal approval for a temporary site to be located in Moraga. Since receiving this approval, Orinda-Moraga Disposal has become aware of new recycl ing technologies and equipment that significantly impact its original proposal. Instead of opening a temporary consol idation center and having one recycl i ng truck, Ori nda-Moraga Di sposa 1 proposes to purchase two state-of-the- art recycling trucks that can handle larger loads than previous models, thus making it more cost effective to transport recycl abl es to nearby processi ng centers in Martinez and Concord. However, Orinda-Moraga Disposal will keep open its option for a consolidation center in Moraga in the event that participation and volume of collected recyclables are much greater than anticipated necessitating such a faci 1 ity. Initially, only single-family homes will participate in the curbside recycling program. Multi-family units (apartments and condominiums) will be added to the program at a later date. Therefore, while the net expense of the recycling program is proposed to be shared by residential and commercial accounts, it is planned that multi-family units will not be assessed until they participate in the recycl ing program. The volume of recyclables collected as well as the level of participation will determine the net expense of the recycling program. Other variables that will impact the cost of the program are the market pri ce of the recycl abl es and the operating expenses associated with collecting and transport of the recyclables. The table below, prepared by a consultant for Orinda-Moraga Disposal, summarizes Orinda-Moraga Disposal's projected monthly customer costs from $.23 -- $1.03 based on various participation levels: Pl anni ng to date in the Ori nda-Moraga area proj ects a parti ci pati on 1 evel of 50%; accordingly, an initial net expense of approximately $ .89 per customer per month is considered reasonable. Orinda-Moraga Disposal will include this expense in its refuse collection rate application for the July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 period. Start-up of the recycl ing program for Orinda and Moraga was scheduled to begin July 1, 1989; however, program implementation is dependent upon delivery of 13028- 9/85 SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE RECYCLING PROGRAM PROPOSED BY ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. AND DETERMINE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM PAGE 3 DATE OF 6 April 3, 1989 the recycling trucks and containers, which are in high demand. If deliveries of equipment are later than expected, implementation could be delayed by 30 to 60 days beyond July. Adjustments to the first year's net expense of the recycling program will be made based on the actual impl ementati on date and revenues and expenses real ized during the first year of the program, and incorporated in the customary refuse collection rate setting process for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1990. Comments Received for the Public Hearing At the presentation of the proposed recycling plan to the Orinda City Council and the Moraga Town Council, written or oral comments for consideration by the Board at the April 6, 1989 public hearing were requested. Written comments from the Orinda City Council are attached. A representative from the Moraga Town Council will attend the public hearing to provide oral comments. While both the Orinda City Council and the Moraga Town Council are in favor of city-wide curbside recycl ing, concern was expressed about the impact that the curbsi de program will have on several non-prof it organizati ons, incl udi ng the Boy Scouts, that currently provide recycl ing services. In Moraga, the Boy Scouts have had a longstanding newspaper drop-off program which provides their major source of revenue. Income from the sale of recycled newspapers is integral to the curbside recycling program proposed by Orinda-Moraga Disposal. George Navone, Vice-President of Orinda-Moraga Disposal, bel ieves the current level of newspaper recycl ing in Moraga has not yet reached its maximum potential, and that both his firm's program and that of the Boy Scouts can benefit from increased recycl ing awareness that a curbside program will generate. On February 7, 1989, District staff, Moraga recycling representative Margaret DePriester, and Mr. Navone met with Boy Scout Troop representatives to discuss the situati on. A mutual agreement was reached whereby the Boy Scouts will receive the income from a guaranteed monthly tonnage. This amount, approximately 79 tons, is based on the average tonnage collected monthly over the past two years. If less than 79 tons of newspaper are collected at the Boy Scout drop box, Orinda-Moraga Disposal will make up the shortfall to the Boy Scouts so that they will still receive the income based upon thei r collecti ng 79 tons per month. If they collect more than 79 tons of newspaper, the additional profit generated will belong to the Boy Scouts. Both the Orinda City Council and Moraga Town Council requested that Orinda-Moraga Disposal consider providing an option for "backyard" recycl ing service to interested residents upon request and to provide an estimate of the cost for this additional serv ice. Ori nda-Moraga Di sposal estimates the monthly incremental charge in additi on to the normal refuse collection rates to be $5.95 in Moraga and $6.10 in Orinda. These costs are computed based upon the cost of backyard pickup service less disposal costs at the landfill. 13028-9/85 SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE RECYCLING PROGRAM PROPOSED BY ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. AND DETERMINE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM PAGE 4 DATE OF 6 April 3, 1989 The Orinda City Council and Moraga Town Council also requested that the recycl ing containers provided by Orinda-Moraga Disposal be earthtone in color, if possible. Mr. Navone indicated that such containers are available at no additional cost, and he will order them. Staff Conclusions District staff endorses the overall recycl ing program proposed by Orinda-Moraga Di sposa 1. The proj ected net expense of the curbs ide recycl i ng program shoul d be i ncl uded in the refuse collection rate application for the July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 period to be submitted by Orinda-Moraga Disposal. An adjustment to the next expense of the recycling program will be made based on actual experience during the first year of the program, and carried over to be incorporated in the customary refuse collection rate setting process for the July 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991 period. RECOMMENDA~: Conduct a public hearing on April 6, 1989 to receive comments from the publ ic and the affected communities on the recycl ing program proposed by Orinda-Moraga Disposal for the communities of Orinda and Moraga and provide direction as to the implementation of the proposed program. 13028- 9/85 ffJ~@mllW&lfJ ..lAN 1 9 1989 26 orinda way . orinda . california 94563 . 415 .~~~~jro..J January 17, 1989 Mr. Paul Morsen Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Morsen: On December 13, 1988, the Orinda City Council conducted a public hearing on the proposal by Orinda/Moraga Disposal to initiate a recycling program. Following public testimony, the Council directed that comments on the following topics be forwarded to the District for consideration in granting the franchisee the opportunity to conduct the program. Program Scope The recycling program should include a curbside and a drop- off component. The Council agreed that a pilot program should not be initiated; rather, a citywide curbside program should be conducted. Drop-Off Site The temporary drop-off site located in Moraga is acceptable, subject to approval by the Town of Moraga. The Council requested that the District further evaluate the appropriateness of the CalTrans owned property near the Gateway interchange (north of Highway 24) for a more permanent site. Operator The Council concurred that the existing franchisee, Orinda Moraga Disposal, should be given the first opportunity to conduct the recycling program in Orinda. Impact on Non-Profit Organizations Several non-profit organizations, including the Boy Scouts, currently provide recycling services. Consideration should be given to methods to protect the current revenue stream enjoyed by these organizations. Mr. Paul Morsen January 17, 1989 Page Two Containers The Council requested that the recycling containers be subtle in color, rather than brightly colored. Other Recyclable Materials The Council requested that future program be considered, including the recycling service for garden clippings materials. enhancements to the capability to provide and other recyclable Existing Services The Council requested that there be refuse service, including the program. no change in the current thrice-annual clean up In addition to these comments that have been referred to the District for your consideration, the City Council requested that one topic be researched and that the Council be advised as to the results of your research. Currently, refuse is collected from backyards in Orinda. In the event that recyclables were similarly collected (i.e. backyard, as opposed to curbside), what would be the impact on collection rates? Thank you proposal by District's comments on for the opportunity to comment on the recycling Orinda/Moraga disposal. We look forward to the consideration of the proposal in general, and your the backyard collection topic. Sincerely, 1 ~rs Mayor BL/TS:nh cc: Jim Campbell George Navone City Council Town of Moraga . Central ",ontra Costa Sanitary .,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER 1989 NO. IV. HEARINGS 2 SUBJECT DATE CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECE IVE COM~NTS ON THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVE~NT FEE SYSTEM FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY Jarred L. Miyamoto-Mills Senior En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Plannin Division ~: The Board of Directors has established the date of April 6, 1989, for a public hearing on the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Residential Development. BACKGROUND: The 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Pl an (CIP) approved by the Board on March 16, 1989, provides for approximately $196 million <1988 dollars) in capital improvement projects to be pursued over the next ten years. The CIP provides the basis for project prioritizing and scheduling, District staffing, and long-range financial planning. The Plan also serves as the framework for fee analysis. Approval of the CIP authorizes staff to use the Plan's project priorities and cash flow assumptions in the fee system analysis. The fee system analysis determined that approximately one-third of the additional flow projected for future connectors will be from non-residential user groups such as retail stores, offices, restaurants, bakeries, industries, schools, and government facilities. In addition, the analysis determined that the current fee system will not generate adequate funding for expansion of District facilities to serve these future connectors. Staff has recommended that a new fee system be established. The proposed fee system would result in substantial increases in the Capital Improvement Fees applicable to several non-residential user groups. The proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Resi denti al Development was submitted to the Board of Di rectors' Capital Projects Committee for review on February 6, 1989. The proposal was submitted to the full Board, and a Board workshop was conducted on February 16, 1989. Over 500 informational brochures descri bi ng the fee proposal for non-resi denti al development were di stri buted by mail on March 17, 1989. In addition, notification of the proposed fee revision was i ncl uded in the March newsl etters of the East Bay Chapter of the AlA (Ameri can Insitutute of Architects) and the PGC (Assocati on of General Contractors). Two publ ic workshops were hel d on March 23 and 28, 1989, to provide an informal setting for discussion of the fee proposal. A summary of comments received duri ng the publ ic workshops and in telephone i nqui ri es is presented in Attachment 1. It is appropriate to receive additional comments from the publ ic pri or to adopti on of the Fee System. April 6, 1989, was establ i shed as the date for this public hearing and appropriate notices have been published. Appropri ate ordi nances and resol uti ons establ i shi ng the Fee System and setti ng the fees are scheduled for Board consideration on April 20, 1989. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 JMK RAB INITIATIN 1,./ 3;V1; tL /J(fJ SUBJECT CX>NDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE CX>MMENTS ON lHE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 3 DATE March 31, 1989 RECX>MMENDATION: Conduct a publ ic heari ng and receive comments on the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Residential Development. Schedule adoption of the Fee System for the May 4, 1989, meeting of the Board of Di rectors. 13028-9/85 PaOL\ 3 of 3 ATTAOftJENT 1 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AND TELEPHONE INQUIRIES A total of five peopl e attended the March 23 and 28, 1989, publ ic workshops on the proposed Non-Residential Facilities Capacity Fee. They represented the following groups: Public Workshop Attendance Medical Building Developer 1 Burger King Franchisee 1 City of Walnut Creek 1 Golden Rain Foundation 1 Safeway Stores 1 TOTAL: 5 In addition, seven telephone inquiries have been received. The following is a summary of the questions that were asked. o Will the new fee apply to existing users? o When will the proposed fee become effective? o May the fees be prepaid to take advantage of the current fees? o Will a special assessment appear on the tax bill? o When will the new fees become effective? o How much is the fee increase for a medical office building? o Who pays for special studies? o What case law exists to require special studies for public entities? o Will a credit be given for building on an existing site? o Will one-third of all future fees be collected from non-residential users? o How will the new fees affect supermarkets? . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ~istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF A ril 6, 1989 PAGE 1 OF 4 NO. IV. HEARINGS 3 DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION HOLD PUBLIC HEARING D. A. 106-0 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106-0 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundaries of several of the parcel s incl uded wrtilTn District Annexation 106. The District must hold a public hearing and consi der testimony by affected property owners before acti ng on the proposed amended annexation. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation consisting of ten separate parcels was sent to LAFCO as required for the formal annexation process. LAFCO amended the boundaries of some of the parcels during its approval process. These amendments were made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. In amending the boundaries of District Annexation 1060, LAFCO combined the original proposed Parcels 4 and 5, and added sufficient properties to change the annexation from uninhabited to inhabited (12 or more registered voters). DA 1060 is being considered separately because the criteria for determining the validity of protests for inhabited annexations is different from the criteria for uninhabited annexations. The criteria for inhabited annexations appears later in this position paper. CEQA REQUIREMENTS A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEQA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CEQA Guidelines Section 7.17(f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration which is attached as Exhibit A before approving the annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS The District must hold a public hearing on District Annexation 1060 because LAFCO amended its boundary. Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of the public hearing as required by law. The subject amended annexation is inhabited (12 or more registered voters). REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~f w 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB KA INITIATING DEPT./DIV. SUBJECT POSITION PAPER HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106-0 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO PAGE DATE 2 OF 4 March 31, 1989 Factors to be considered by the Board in deciding to approve or disapprove the proposed annexation are set forth as Exhibit B.* Following its review, the Board, not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the public heari ng, shall adopt a resol uti on refl ecti ng the appropri ate acti on taken: 1. Certify that the Board has reviewed and consi dered the Negative Decl arati on and concurs with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO. 2. Order the annexati on subj ect to confi rmati on by the regi stered voters resi di ng withi n the territory proposed to be annexed 1f written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by either of the following: a. At 1 east 25 percent but 1 ess than 50 percent of the regi stered voters residing within the affected territory, or b. At least 25 percent of the number of owners of land who also own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. 3. Order the annexation without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. 4. If it is determined that an election is required, the Board may terminate the proceedings and avoid the cost of an election ($200:!: special malling election by County Election Department). The executive officer of LAFCO has stated we coul d then resubmit the original proposal and he woul d not recommend any additions, thus keeping the annexation 100 percent owner consent. 5. Disapprove the annexation if the Board finds the annexation is improper based upon any of the factors set forth in Exhibit B~ 6. Disapprove and abandon the proposed annexation if the Board finds that written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public hearing representing 50 percent or more of the voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed. REOOt+1ENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing, receive any testimony, and close the public hearing. 13028-9/85 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106-0 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO POSITION PAPER PAGE 3 OF 4 DATE March 31, 1989 Adopt a Resol ution certifying that the Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a responsible agency stating that the Board considered the Negative Declaration concurring with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO, and taking one of the following actions: a. Order the annexation if no written protests are filed. b. Order the annexati on subj ect to confi nnati on by the regi stered voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by either of the following: (1) At least 25 percent but less than 50 percent of the registered voters residing within the affected territory, or (2) At 1 east 25 percent of the number of owners of 1 and who al so own at least 25 percent of the assessed val ue of land within the affected territory. c. Order the annexation without an el ecti on if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of 1 and owni ng 1 ess than 25 percent of the assessed val ue of 1 and within the affected territory. d. Disapprove the proposed annexation if the Board determines that the annexation is not warranted, c. Disapprove and abandon the annexation if the Board finds that written protests have been fil ed and not withdrawn pri or to the conclusion of the public hearing representing 50 percent or more of the registered voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed, * NOTE: Exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. 13028-9/85 PAGE 4 of 4 ~~~ .1 'j~ ~~ I~ -\ '----- QV'~ DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106 PARCEL 4 & 5 O.A. 1 06-0 . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..Astrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 9 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF A rll 6, 1989 NO. IV. HEARINGS 4 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATIONS 106-8, 106-C, 106-E, 106-F, 106-G AND 106-H AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DEClARATION BY LAFCO DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS D.A. 106B, 106C, 106E, 106F, 106G, and 106H SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundari es of several of the parcel s i ncl uded within District Annexation 106. The District must hold a publ ic hearing and consi der testimony by affected property owners before acti ng on the proposed amended annexation. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexati on was sent to LAFCO as requi red for the formal annexation process. Part of the annexation, consisting of two parcel s, was not changed. These two unamended parcel s are bei ng submitted for Board action on the consent calendar as District Annexation 106-A. No public heari ng is requi red for these parcel s because they have 100 percent 1 andowner consent. LAFCO amended the boundaries of the eight remaining parcels during its approval process. These amendments were made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. The amended annexations are designated D.A. 106-B through Hand are considered to be seven separate annexations. One, D.A. 106-D is an un i nhabi ted annexati on and is the subj ect of a sepa rate posi ti on paper on th i s agenda. The remaining six amended annexations, which are uninhabited, are shown on the attached maps. CECA REQUIREMENTS A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEQA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CECA Guidelines Section 7.17(f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration which is attached as Exhibit A before approving the annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS District Annexation 106 as submitted to LAFCO was a single annexation. The action by LAFCO separated District Annexation 106 into the subject six uninhabited annexations, which requi re a public hearing. Normally a separate public hearing would be held for each of these six subject annexations. If no members of the publ ic appear, these annexati ons can be consi dered in one publ ic hearing. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/BS DH JSM RAB KA I-Oa m INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. . ._.."-----,~---~-~--_..,.~,,-_._.__...~.__._~'--------_.~~._-".._---,-,----"--_._".__._._"...._..."._.,..'-'--'" _..--~.,.._._"'-_._.."."_.,,..._._,,-------- SUBJECT POSITION PAPER HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATIONS 106-B, 106-C, 106-E, 106-F, 106-G AND 106-H AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO PAGE 2 OF 9 DATE March 31, 1989 If a member of the public wishes to testify on a particul ar annexation, a separate public hearing shall be held on the annexation. The remaining annexations will then be the subject of a second public hearing. Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of the public hearings as required by law. The amended annexations are uninhabited (fewer than 12 regi ster voters). Factors to be consi dered by the Board in deci di ng to approve or di sapprove the proposed annexati ons are set forth as Exhibit B. Following its review, the Board, not more than thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the public hearing, shall adopt a resolution reflecting the appropriate action taken: 1. Certify that the Board has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a responsible agency stati ng that the Board consi dered the Negative Decl arati on, and concurs with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO. 2. Order the annexation if no written majority protest exists. 3. Disapprove the proposed annexations based upon any of the factors set forth in Exhibit B.* 4. Terminate the annexation if the Board finds that written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the hearing representing 1 andowners owni ng 50 percent or more of the assessed val ue of the 1 and within the territory proposed to be annexed. RECO~ENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing on all of the annexations or individual hearings on D.A. 106-B, C, E, F, G, and H as appropri ate, receive any testimony, and close the public hearing(s). 2. Adopt a Resol ution certifying that the Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a responsi bl e agency stati ng that the Board consi de red the Negative Declaration, and concurring with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO and taking one of the following actions: l..._______.. 1302B-9/85 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATIONS 106-B, 106-C, 106-E, 106-F, 106-G AND 106-H AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO POSITION PAPER PAGE 3 OF 9 DATE March 31, 1989 o Order the annexations if no majority protest exists, or o Di sapprove one or more of the proposed annexations that the Board determines that the annexation is not warranted, or o Disapprove an annexation if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public hearing representing landowners owning SO percent or more of the assessed valuation of the land within the territory to be annexed. *NOTE: Exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. --------.. 1302B-9/85 EXISTING CCCSO BoUNDARY PAGE 4 of 9 PORJ LOT 89 RESUB OF BLOC}(S FJ'Y!&.L ORiJYDA PAR}( TERR}JCE ADDED BY LAFCO DISTRICT ANNEXATION PARCEL 1 106 ~ \@7 ~ ~ .. .-.- * . PREVIOUS ANNEXATION . EXISTING CCCSO BOUN · PROPOSED ANNEXA nO! · SIGNED PEnnON D.A. 1 06-8 TRACT 4107 @ '~1'2 DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106 PARCEL 3 PAGE 5 of 9 o~. q. ~ \ge3 @ \%9 D.A. 106-C PAGE 6 of 9 '\;6: :So O~I 0-3 ~ i:>, >!' ~0 {t o 'k 1<< <:>- ~( kQ ~ ~ ~ .. .--. * . PREVIOUS ANNEXATION . EXlsnNG CCCSO BOUNDARY . PROPOSED ANNEXATION . SIGNED pmTlON DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106 PARCEL 6 D.A. 106-E PAGE 7 of 9 1f\p.G1 ~ YJ!) 2- \B9 ,/ ,~ \.3 S f'lJ . .3.40 ~ ~ (, I.~".l , ADDED BY LAFCO ~ ~ DISTRICT ANNEXATION PARCEL 7 106 D.A.106-F PAGE 8 of 9 I A SERENA ~ iYlA1YOR ,4' N4,.33'4S'W 110. iRACi 20// /.5 ~ ~~}I"lC\ ~ I I RA/'YlDN ~ ~ .,. - PREVIOUS ANNEXA nON - aJSTlNG 'CCCSO BOUNDARY - PROPOseD ANNEXA nON - SIGNED. PEnnON ----. * ~ \ ~ ;,1 <~~ ,., .s:~-- P, DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106 PARCEL 8 D.A. 106-G PAGE 9 of 9 TIS, RIW- MD.B.M ALLZN 5.!J.730Ji. LJ.D @ .. ---- * . PAmous ~ . EllIsnNG ccc:so lIOUNDARy . I'IIOPOSED ~ . 8IClHED PETI'l1OH @ TIMMONS ~ O.R.G.G.9 :#( S_46'W 9e&!: '~ \ \ I DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106 PARCEL 9 D.A. 1 06-H ., Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ~istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 6 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Aprl1 6, 1989 NO. IV. HEARINGS 5 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATIONS 107-B, 107-C, AND 107-D AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS D.A. 107B, 107C, and 107D SUBMITIED BY uenni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATI~G D!;PT.lDIV. D ~ng1neer1ng epartment/ Construction Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundaries of several of the parcel s incl uded W'i'thin District Annexation 107. The District must hold a public hearing and consi der testimony by affected property owners before acti ng on the proposed amended annexation. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFCO as required for the formal annexation process. Part of the annexation, consisting of five parcel s, was not changed. These five unamended parcel s are bei ng submitted for Board action on the consent calendar as District Annexation 107-A. No publ ic hearing is required for these parcels because they have 100 percent landowner consent. Of the five remaining parcel s, two were combined by LAFCO into one parcel which resulted in the decrease of the remaining parcels from five to four. LAFCO amended the boundaries of these four parcels during its approval process. These amendments were made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. The amended annexations are designated D.A. 107-B through E and are considered to be four separate annexations. D.A. 107-E (consisting of two parcel s which were combined into one) is an uninhabited annexation covered by an Environmental Impact Report (E.I.R.), and is the subject of a separate position paper on this agenda. The remaining three amended annexations, which are uninhabited, are shown on the attached maps. CEnAREQUIREMENTS A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEnA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CEnA Guidelines Section 7.17(f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration which is attached as Exhibit A before approving the annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB KA INITIATIN~~PT.lDrv. Jill ~ SUBJECT POSITION PAPER HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATIONS 107-B, 107-C AND 107-0 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO PAGE DATE 2 OF 6 March 31, 1989 ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS District Annexation 107 as submitted to LAFCO was a single annexation. The action by LAFCO separated District Annexation 107 into the subject three uninhabited annexations, which requi re a public hearing. Normally a separate public hearing would be held for each of these three subject annexations. If no members of the public appear, these annexations can be considered in one public hearing. If a member of the public wishes to testify on a particular annexation, a separate public hearing shall be held on the annexation. The remaining annexations will then be the subject of a second public hearing. Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of the public hearings as required by law. The amended annexations are uninhabited (fewer than 12 register voters). Factors to be considered by the Board in deci di ng to approve or di sapprove the proposed annexati ons are set forth as Exhibit B.* Following its review, the Board, not more than thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the public hearing, shall adopt a resolution reflecting the appropriate action taken: 1. Certify that the Board has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration and concurs with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO. 2. Order the annexation if no written majority protest exists. 3. Disapprove the proposed annexations based upon any of the factors set forth in Exhibit B.* 4. Terminate the annexation if the Board finds that written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the hearing representing 1 andowners owni ng 50 percent or more of the assessed val ue of the 1 and within the territory proposed to be annexed. RECOt-tlJENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing on all of the annexations or individual hearings on O.A. 107-8, C, and 0, as appropriate, receive any testimony, and close the public hearing(s). --------- 13028-9/85 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATIONS 107-B, 107-C, AND 107-0 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 3 OF 6 March 31, 1989 2. Adopt a Resolution certifying that the Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a responsible agency stating that the Board considered the Negative Declaration, and concurring with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO and taking one of the following actions: o Order the annexations if no majority protest exists, or o Di sapprove one or more of the proposed annexati ons that the Boa rd determines that the annexation is not warranted, or o 01 sapprove annexation if written protests have been fll ed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public hearing representing 1 andowners owni ng 50 percent or more of the assessed val uati on of the land within the territory to be annexed, * NOTE: Exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. 1..._______ 13028-9/85 u (2.~ ~ J.-A NO.1 ~~5 GAP- PAGE 4 of 6 ADDED BY LAFCO Q = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ~ EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ~-~. = -- - PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 1~7 PARCEL 3 D.A.107-B PAGE 5 of 6 /'/.,;/ " 1/ l-) "" <...' /, 1 ,-, "'_I' ,1-:: ..-, "" .., -. '..-/~'..';X ..::: c~~ ,.;. _=j ADDED BY LAFCO . ..,_. ""'-;,0.....,. Q ~= PREVIOUS ANNEXATION :.."",.--.., = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY - - = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION ~ DISTRICT. ANNEXATION 107 D.A. 107-C PARCEL 6 PAGE 6 of 6 FELLER 5573 o,~. 640 @ 1'186 ADDED BY LAFCO ~ / @ PREVIOUS ANNEXATION DATE = ~,.-:~. = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY -- = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107 PARCEL 8 D.A.107-D . Central ...:ontra Costa Sanitary .Astrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. IV. HEARINGS 6 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107-E (MAGEE DIABLO RANCH) AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COt-'MISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS PREPARED BY THE TOWN OF DANVILLE DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION Hold Public Hearing D. A. 107-E SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundaries of several of the parcels included within i5'1'5t'rict Annexation 107. The District must hold a public hearing and consider testimony by affected property owners before acti ng on the proposed amended annexation. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFCO as required for the formal annexation process. Part of the annexati on, consi sti ng of five parcel s, was not changed. These five unamended parcel s are bei ng submitted for Board action on the consent calendar as District Annexation 107-A. No public hearing is required for these parcels because they have 100 percent landowner consent. Of the five remaining parcels, two were combined by LAFCO into one parcel which resulted in the decrease of the remaining parcel s from five to four. LAFCO amended the boundaries of these four parcel s during its approval process. These amendments were made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. The amended annexations are designated as D.A. 107-B through E and are considered to be four separate annexations. D.A. 107-B, 107-C, and 107-0 are uninhabited annexations covered by a Negative Declaration of environmental significance and are the subject of a separate position paper on this agenda. A map is attached showing the remaining amended annexation, which is uninhabited and covered by an Environmental Impact Report. Annexation 107-E consists of two separate areas containing 428.54 acres and 161.83 acres, respectively. LAFCO has added a single parcel of land containing 3.0 acres to the largest parcel. Omission of this three-acre parcel would otherwise create an island within the District boundaries. CEOA REQUIREMENTS The Magee Diablo Ranch project is proposed for this area and will consist of 254 single family residential units and 116 mUlti-family units on the west <largest) parcel and 26 single family units on the east parcel. A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for Magee Diablo Ranch addressing the proposed annexati on has been prepared for the Town of Danvill e Cacti n9 as 1 ead agency) pursuant to the Cal iforni a Environmental Qual ity Act (CEOA). LAFCO has reviewed and considered the FEIR for this annexation (project) in making its determinations and approving this annexation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1/1 JSM KA {),y 1302A-9/85 DH SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107-E (MAGEE DIABLO RANCH) AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS PREPARED BY THE TOWN OF DANVILLE POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 4 DATE March 31, 1989 For this project, LAFCO has designated the District, under CEQA, to be the Responsible (Conducting) Agency. The Responsible Agency is the public agency which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which a Lead Agency has prepared an EIR. As a Responsible Agency, the District must consider the town of Danville's decision to prepare an FEIR as final unless the exceptions found in Section 4.1.(c), 4.3, and 11.3 of the District's CEQA Guidelines exist. These sections are attached as Exhibit A. District staff has evaluated the decision by the Town of Danville to prepare an FEIR specifically with respect to District CEQA Guidel ines Sections 4.1.(c), 4.3, and 11.3 and has found that no exceptional circumstances exist. Before approving the annexation, the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the FEIR, portions of which relating to sanitary sewer facilities are attached as Exhibit B. The entire FEIR has been made available to the Board and is on file at the District offices. The si gnificant envi ronmental impacts whi ch were i dentif ied in the FEIR and rel ated mitigation measures are summarized in the Town of Danville's Resolution No. 97-87, which is attached as Exhibit C. * The District as Responsible Agency has responsibility for mitigating or avoiding direct and indirect environmental effects on those parts of the project which it approves in this annexation. The parts of this project which the District will approve are the design of the sewer system for the subdivision which is to be built within the property to be annexed and the connection of the sewer system to the District's system. The District as a Responsible Agency shall not approve the project as proposed if the District finds any feasible alternative or feasible mitigation measures within its powers that woul d substanti ally lessen or avoi d any si gnificant effect the project would have on the environment. To complete its consideration of the environmental effects, the Board must make findings pursuant to District CEQA Guidelines Sections 7.12 and 7.14 regarding each significant impact identified in the FEIR and whether each si gnificant impact has been el imi nated, substanti all y lessened, or properly mitigated. Staff's proposed CEQA findings are attached as Exhibit D and are proposed for adoption by the Board. ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notifed of the public hearing as required by law. The amended annexations are uninhabited (fewer than 12 register voters). Factors to be considered by the Board in deciding to approve or disapprove the proposed annexations are set forth as Exhibit E.* '--------. 13028-9/85 SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107-E (MAGEE DIABLO RANCH) AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS PREPARED BY THE TOWN OF DANVILLE POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 3 OF 4 March 31, 1989 As submitted, Annexation 107-E consisted of two separate areas with a total 1988-89 assessed 1 and val ue of $3,308,851.00 The 1988-89 assessed 1 and val ue of the parcel added by LAFCO is $47,386. Therefore, there is no poss1b1l1ty of a majority protest of this annexation. Following its review, the Board, not more than thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the public hearing, shall adopt a resolution reflecting the appropriate action taken: 1. Certify that the Board has reviewed and considered the FEIR. 2. Disapprove annexation if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public hearing representing landowners owning 50 percent or more of the assessed valuation of the land within the territory to be annexed. 3. Approve the proposed annexation based upon a favorabl e resul t from the consideration of the factors set forth in Exhibit E*and order the annexation if no written majority protest exists. RECOt+1ENDATION: 1. Open the publ1c hearing or hearings as appropriate, receive any testimony, and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt a Resolution which 1) certifies that the Board has reviewed the FEIR prepared by the Town of Danvllle, 2) orders the f1l1ng of a Notice of Determination as a responsible agency stating that the Board considered the FEIR, 3) adopts the proposed findings of staff, 4) orders the Secretary of the District to file a Notice of Determination and 5) orders the territory annexed if no written majority protest exists. * NOTE: Exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. 13028-9/85 ADDED BY LAFCO .A I --1- I (j) 43/.54Ac. 60~A- 5Utl. GiD ~ ~ ~ \0 CIJ' 18 5Jj P. j'd.. 34 I I I +- I 3,450:!. ;:;. \. ~ OJ ~ . o \I) 9:~1 slJt>. . -- -,~,~?,- ...... GEN5TAR OEV. co. Pc/. One (/050Z O.Ro.547) @ 161. 83Ac. I I I ~S__ 35136 .v8rS6'11~W 1,4-56.86 ~!...;.. '",.:;-1.., .......;.\ "-;.;""= ,,,::~." .;., PAGE 4 of 4 i . J P08. I .. @ 1'17> ~ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ~ = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ... '-'."'" __ = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107 PARCELS 9 and 10 D.A. 107.E . Centra~ ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 11 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 15 SUBJECT ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106-A DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION COMPLETE ANNEXATION OF DA 106-A SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: A resolution by the District's Board of Director's must be adopted to fTnaiize District Annexation 106-A. BACKGROUND: The District previously made application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation of ten parcels of land designated as District Annexation 106. LAFCO has considered this request and has recommended that Parcels 2, and 10, as shown on the attachments, be processed as submitted. LAFCO has designated this parcel to be District Annexation No. 106-A. No public heartng is required and the annexation of these parcels can be completed. A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEnA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CEnA Guidelines Section 7.17(f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration which is attached as Exhibit A before approving the annexati on. Di strict staff has reviewed sai d Negative Decl arati on and concurs with its findings. RECOt+tENDATION: Adopt a resol ution concurring with and adopting the Negative Declaration of LAFCO, certifying that the Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a Responsible Agency stating that the District considered the Negative Declaration as prepared by LAFCO as required, and ordering the completion of District Annexation No. 106-A. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB KA {9Il INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 'r" _____EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY BROO}()tYOOD ~ ~ ~ ~ .. --.. * ANNEXATION 106 PAGE 2 of 11 · PREVIOUS ANNEXAnON · EXlmNG CCCSD ItOUNDARv · PROPosED ~TION · .GNED PETmoN D.A. 106-A PAGE 3 of 11 StON C VALLEY ;!;;.,~~~-... ~ ~ POINT OF BEGINNING 'io- '.' DISTRICT ANNEXATION 106 PARCEL 10 D.A. 106-A LO( AGENCY FORMATION COMMIsr---'N (LAFCO) EXHIBIT A OF CONTRA COSTA CO~_ NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE Person (Applicant): Central Contra Costa Sanitary Distric~ Project Title: CCCSD Annexation No. 106 (LAFC 88-39) Project Location: Orinda, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Alamo Areas ~SPODSible Agency Contact Person: Dewey E. Mansfield, Executive Officer i Contra Costa County 8th Floor, McBrien Administration Bldg. Martinez, CA 94553 (415) 646-4090 GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Nature, Purpose, Beneficiaries, Reasons Environmentally Insignificant): This is for the annexation of 16 acres of land to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. The sites are scattered in the Alamo, Lafayette, Orinda and Walnut Creek areas which are infill in nature. There are 10 separate annexation areas being considered for inclusion with the District. These areas are all planned for development and have no unique characteristics which make this annexation environ- mentally significant. The addition of additional lands in the annexation are also infill and will not have a signif~cant effect on the environment. It ~s determined from initial study by JIM CUTLER that this project does not have a significant effect on the environment. ( X) Justification for negative declaration is attached. The office. Date of Final Appeal: December 14, 1988 Original: County Clerk cc: LAFCO File LOC~' AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSIQr: (LAFCO) OF CONTRA COSTA comrr INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ~.!GNIFIC~CE File Name: LAFC 88-39 Prepared By: JIM CUTLER Date: November 30, 1988 A. RE~ATION: ( )Categorical Exemption (X)Negative Declaration ( )Environmental Impact Report Required ~he project (May) (Will Not) Have A Significant Effect On The Environment. These areas are all planned for development and have no unique charac- teristics which make this annexation environmentally significant. The addition of additional lands in the annexation are also infill and will not have a significant effect on the environment. B. PROJECT INFORMATION: 1. Project Location and Description: This is for the annexation of 16 acres of land to the Central contra Costa sanitary District. The sites are scattered in the Orinda, pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek and Alamo areas which are infill in nature. There are 10 separate annexation areas being considered for inclusion with the District. 2. Site Description: The areas are all parcelized or approved for development, and their annexation will help fulfill adopted city and County General Plans. 3. Character of surrounding Areas: Developed as single-familY residential lands or vacant lands planned for development. -3- c. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS: 1. Does the project conform to City or County General plan proposals including the various adopted Elements? X.!.! H2 Maybe N I A l -- General plan Designation~ source: County, Walnut Creek, Orinda, Pleasant Hill General plans 2. Does the project conform to existing (or proposed) zoning classification? ~-- Classification: varying single-family residential designations 3. Does it appear that any feature of the project, including aesthetics, will generate significant public concern? _-L- Nature of Concern: 4. Will the project require approval or permits by agencies other than LAFCO? l -- *s=Significant N=Negligible c=cumulative No=None U=Unknown N/A=Not APplicable Other Agency? central contra Costa Sanitary District D. ENVIRO~AL IMPACTS: (\nclude mitigation measures for ~ignificant effects where possible) *S N C No U N/A ------ 1. Earth will the proposal result in or be subject to: a) Erection of structures within an Alquist- Priolo Act special Studies Zone? -~-- b) Grading (consider amount and aesthetics)? done for development application c) Slides, liquefaction or other hazards on or immediately adjoining the site? x ------ _ _ _ L d) Adverse soil or topographic characteristics (consider soils type, slope, septic tank limitations, etc.)? - -- L e) Wind or water erosion of soils, on site or off? f) Prime agricultural lands? ___L- ___L- Discussion: -4- 2. Air will the project result in deterioration of existing air quality, including creation of objectionable odors? Discussion: 3. Water Will the project result in: a) Erection of structures within a designated flood hazard (prone) area? b) Reduction of surface or ground water quality or quantity? c) ~lteration of drainage patterns or runoff? d) Disruption of streams or water bodies? ~ !! ~ !2 !l MIA X ------ Discussion: Previously modified under County approval 4. Plant/~nimal Life Will the project result in: a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants or animals? b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants or animals? c) Introduction of new species of plants or animals into an area, or inhibition of the normal replenishment, migration or movement of existing-species? d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop or existing fish or wildlife habitat? Discussion: ~. Noise will the project result in: a) Structures within the 60dB~ noise contour per the General plan Noise Element? b) Increases from existing noise levels? Discussion: 6. Natural Resources Will the project affect the potential use, extraction, conservation or depletion of a natural resource? Discussion: ___x ___x x - --- _L_ X ----- x ----- x - -- -5- 7. Energy will the project result in demands upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new energy sources? Discussion: annexation to Central San s ! ~ l!2 !l MIA X ----- 8. Utilities Will the project result in the need for new systems or alterations to the following utilities (including sphere of influence or district boundary change): electricity, natural gas, communications facilities, water, sewers, storm drainage, solid waste disposal? X Discussion: annexation to Central San 9. Public Services Will the project result in the need for: a) New or altered services in the following areas: fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or other recreational facilities, roads, flood control or other public works facilities, public transit or other governmental services? b) Alteration of sphere of influence boundaries? c) Alteration-of service district boundaries? Discussion: annexation to central San _l X ------ X ------ 10. Transportation/circulation (Consider the Circulation Element) Will the project result in: a) Generation of additional vehicular movement with initiation or intensification of circulation problems (consider road design, project access, congestion, hazards to vehicles, pedestrians)? - - - ~ b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demands for new parking? c) Impact on existing waterborne, rail, air or public transportation systems? Discussion: part of previous County approval ___l- ___l- .. -6- 11. Growth Inducement Will the project: a) Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of an area'? 2 N ~ !!2 !l M/A L b) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? X c) Establish a precedent for additional requests for similar uses? _ _ _ X d) Impacts or include agricultural preserve lands'? X e) Impact on agricultural production? x ---- Discussion: Minor infill annexations 12. Aesthetics Will the project obstruct any public scenic vista or view, create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or produce new light or glare? ___L__ Discussion: 13. Recreation Will the project affect the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities? L 14. Archeological/Historical Are there known archeological, historical or other resources on the site or in the general vicinity? (Historical Resources Inventory and archeological site maps) __L__ Discussion: 15. Hazard Will the project result in a risk of explosion, release of hazardous substances or other dangers to public health or safety? x ---- Discussion: -7- 16. Other (Consider impact on open space or sprawl) Will the project result in other significant effects on the environment? S H C No Y N/A ___L_ Discussion: 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance (A "significant" check on any of the following questions requires preparation of an EIR) a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment? x b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? L c) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? L d) Does the project have environmental impacts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? L__ Discussion: Local Agency Formation Commission of Contra Costa County McBrien Administration Building, 8th Floor 651 Pine Street Martinez, California 94553 (415) 646-4090 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY NOTICE OF DETERMINATION ON PROJECT UNDER CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Lead Agency 4 ~ U lL mID DEe 21 '988 J q OLSSON CountY Clerk ~/;NTRA COSTA C6UNTY 11)0. F\..ACl<.\JIiY Local Agency Formation Commission Contra Costa County McBrien Administration Building Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: (415) 646-4090 Dewey E. Mansfield Executive Officer PROJECT DESCRIPTION: DISTRICT ANNEXATION NO. 106 TO CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT (LAFC 88-39), this proposal would annex + or - 16.19 acres in ten separate parcels adjacent to existing CCCSD boundaries in the vicinity of the communities of Alamo, Lafayette, Orinda and Walnut Creek. Property submitted for annexation is identified by Assessor Parcel Nos. (APN) 139.071-043; 167-100-007; 188-360-002, 016; 188-370-014; 196-020-005; 196-050-011; 198-111-032 and 256-060-010. The Executive Officer recommended and the Commission approved amending the boundaries identified by APN 139-071-007, 009; 188-360-023; 188-370-006, 007, 009, 010; 196-020-004, 006, 007; 198-111-025, 033; 265-060-009 and 011. Also included is a + or - 415 foot segment of the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way between Cervato Drive and Diablo Vista. Applicant: CCCSD Decision of Project:" X Approved _Denied _Withdrawn Decision on Environmental Impact: Will X Will not have sig~ificant effect Environmental Impact Report: Prepared X Not required LAFCO Negative Declaration--- --- By: ~ Date: cc: LAFCO . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..Astrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 12 NO. V. DATE March 31 19 TYPE OF ACTION POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF CONSENT CALENDAR 16 SUBJECT ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION l07-A COMPLETE ANNEXATION OF DA 107-A SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: A resolution by the District's Board of Director's must be adopted to fTnaiize District Annexation 107-A. aACKGROUND: The District previously made application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation of ten parcels of land designated as District Annexation 107. LAFCO has considered this request and has recommended that Parcel s 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7, as shown on the attachments, be processed as submitted. LAFCO has designated these parcels to be District Annexation No. 107-A. No public hearing is required and the annexation of these parcels can be completed. A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEQA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CEQA Guidelines Section 7.17(f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration which is attached as Exhibit A before approving the annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. RECOM\1ENDATION: Adopt a resolution concurring with and adopting the Negative Declaration of LAFCO, certifying that the Board has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a Responsible Agency stating that the District considered the Negative Declaration as prepared by LAFCO as required, and ordering the completion of District Annexation No. 107-A. 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB KA REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR '0;( ~ INITIATING DEPT./DIV. c:: C:C:$~,. ~, ,'. !:. ,t:; i':,; ~1- 0:: . -' ~ ,..:~ ~ ~ Po A. 87 - 28 ~ b_ .... I) .. "- ~ PtlfJ. /t/8"-44'W S4f.ZO ~ ~= PREVIOUS ANNEXA 1101'4 ...~{ -I '._:'6'1 . '" _~ = EXISTING (((SO BOUNDARY -- = PROPOSED ANNEXA 1101'4 * = SIGNED PETITION . : SITE DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107 PARCELS 1 and 2 PAGE 2 of 12 D.A. 107.A ,,(J/lTHItID6E RD. , /~. ~/ ,,~r Page 3 of 12 21 ~ V!!!J _'\r:lito....:..-.r-:s:... p,Q.EJ. W0005 2786 O~.4Z .I~D. .,1. tS 1t/l.;. " (@J \!!!!J ~ ~ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION .::::.. : EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY * PROPOSED ANNEXATION = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107 PARCEL 4 D.A. 107.A / I//~' _. .. " _. PAGE 4 of 12 ,:...1/:,' r':. ,::.: ;,:' /1,'.~ .:.~~;. 3 RD. , 6/lMORE U8'i a.ll. $74 .-~_. ~ \!!!!J PREVIOUS ANNEXATION = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY -- = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION '.~ ....... ;+1 .-' I I __ DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107 PARCEL 5 D.A. 107.A PAGE 5 of 12 \ M~ 0a:.~/i! \ . Z7r~ al( . Z3'! \ \. @ \ ~ . J'IBt \ ' ~ EI-L10TT . 574-0 IJ./t. 378 \ \ I / / / / / / ~ \!Y= PREVIOUS ANNEXATION T,...........:: EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY -- :: PROPOSED ANNEXA TlON ~ :: SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 107 PARCEL 7 D.A. 107-A toe: AGENCY FORMATION COMMISS1-. (LAFCO) OF CONTRA COSTA CO~ EXHIBIT ;. ., .4 . NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE Person (Applicant): Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Project Location: Walnut Creek, Martinez and Alamo ~ OE~ 3~ 1~B fill Project Title: District Annexation 1107 (LAFC 88-50) Responsible Agency Contact Person: Dewey E. Mansfield, Executive Officer Contra Costa County 8th Floor, McBrien Administration Bldg. Martinez, CA 94553 (415) 646-4090 J R OLSSON. Countv Clerk CONTRA. COSTA. COUNTY By Deputy GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Nature, purpose, Beneficiaries, Re~sons Environmentally Insignificant): This is for the annexation of approximately ten acres of land to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. The eight separate areas are located within the communities of Martinez, Walnut Creek and Alamo. The Executive Officer may recommend th~ addition of parcels to provide for a more logical boundary. This project will allow small existing lots to annex to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. There is no known environmental impact associated with this annexation or with the addition of parcels for -' . 'incfu~ibn. tn-this-request~-as .suggested by the LAFCO Executive Officer. - It is determined from initial study by JIM CUTLER that this project does not have a significant effect on the environment. ( X) Justification for negative declaration is attached. The Initial Study is available at the above-noted office. Date posted: DEC30 1988 Signed by. LAFCO Executiv Date of Final Appeal: January 11, 1989 Original: County Clerk cc: LAFCO File LOCA" --'GENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE File Name: LAFC 88-50 Prepared By: JIM CUTLER Date: 12/27/88 A. RECOMMENDATION: ( )Categorical Exemption {X)Negative Declaration ( )Environmental Impact Report Required The project (May) (Will Not) Have A Significant Effect On The Environment. This project will allow small existing lots to annex to the central Contra Costa sanitary district. There is no known environmental impact associated with this annexation or with the addition of parcels for inclusion in this request as suggested by the LAFCO Executive Officer. B. PROJECT. INFORMATION: 1. Project Location and Description: This is -for the annexation of approximately ten acres of land to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary district. The eight separate parcels are located within the communities of Martinez, Walnut Creek and Alamo. The Executive Officer may recommend the addition of parcels to provide for a more logical boundary. 2. Site Description: These lots are all located in areas which are planned for urban development by the Cities of Martinez, Walnut Creek, and/or the County. In some cases, homes already exist on the site and have failing septic tanks. 3. Character of Surrounding Areas: All areas are planned or have existing homes on them. These are all infill lots. -3- C. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS: 1. Does the project conform to City or County General plan proposals including the various adopted Elements? Planned residential areas Yes No Maybe N/A x General Plan Designation; source: Walnut Creek, Martinez and County General Plans 2. Does the project conform to existing (or proposed) zoning classification? x -- Classification: R-20 and related city & County zoning categories 3. Does it appear that any feature of the project, including aesthetics, will generate significant public concern? x Nature of Concern: 4. Will the project require approval or permits by agencies other than LAFCO? X Other Agency? Central Contra Costa Sanitary District *S=Significant N=Negligible c=Cumulative No=None U=Unknown N/A=Not Applicable D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: (include mitigation measures for significant effects where possible) ,,*S .!!C Noll N/A. 1. Earth Will the proposal result in or be subject to: a) Erection of structures within an Alquist- Priolo Act special Studies Zone? x ------ b) Grading (consider amount and aesthetics)? done for development application c) Slides, liquefaction or other hazards on or immediately adjoining the site? X X ------ d) Adverse soil or topographic characteristics (consider soils type, slope, septic tank limitations, etc.)? Will have failing septic systems K- e) Wind or water erosion of soils, on site or off? f) Prime agricultural lands? K- L__ Discussion: -4- 2. Air Will the project result in deterioration of existing air quality, including creation of objectionable odors? Discussion: 3. Water Will the project result in: a) Erection of structures within a designated flood hazard (prone) area? b) Reduction of surface or ground water quality or quantity? c) Alteration of drainage patterns or runoff? d) Disruption of streams or water bodies? Discussion: 4. Plant/Animal Life Will the project result in: a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants or animals? b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants or animals? c) Introduction of new species of plants or animals into an area, or inhibition of the normal replenishment, migration or movement of e~isting speci~s? -. -.: -- ':-. " -- - - " - d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural"crop or existing fish or wildlife habitat? Discussion: 5. Noise Will the project result in: a) Structures within the 60dBA noise contour per the General Plan Noise Element? b) Increases from existing noise levels? Discussion: 6. Natural Resources Will the project affect the potential use, extraction, conservation or depletion of a natural resource? Discussion: ~ N ~ No ~ N/A --_-!-- _-! _-!_- X ---- X ---- --_-!-- ~-- X ---- X ---- X ------ X ------ --_-!_- -5- 7. Energy Will the project result in demands upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new energy sources? S !! f. !!2 !! N/A ___X Discussion: 8. Utilities Will the project result in the need for new systems or alterations to the following utilities (including sphere of influence or district boundary change): electricity, natural gas, communications facilities, water, sewers, storm drainage, solid waste disposal? X Discussion: Annexation to a sewer district 9. Public Services Will the project result in the need for: a) New or altered services in the following areas: fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or other recreational facilities, roads, flood control or other public works facilities, public transit or other governmental services? ----- b) Alteration of sphere of influence boundaries? -~c): Alteration 6f~service~istrict~~unda~~esZ Discussion: Annexation to a sewer district --~-- X -~--- 10. Transportation/Circulation (Consider the Circulation Element) Will the project result in: a) Generation of additional vehicular movement with initiation or intensification of circulation problems (consider road design, project access, congestion, hazards to vehicles, pedestrians)? - - - b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demands for new parking? X --- X .c) Impact on existing waterborne, rail, air or public transportation systems? .JL Discussion: -6- 11. Growth Inducement Will the project: a) Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of an area? S N C No U N/A -~ b) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? -~ c) Establish a precedent for additional requests for similar uses? --~ d) Impacts or include agricultural preserve lands? e) Impact on agricultural production? - - - ~ X - - -- Discussion: 12. Aesthetics Will the project obstruct any public scenic vista or view, create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or produce new light or glare? --~ Discussion: I. -- 13. Recreation Will the project -affect the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities? - - - ~ 14. Archeological/Historical Are there known archeological, historical or other resources on the site or in the general vicinity? (Historical Resources Inventory and archeological site maps) - - - !- - -- Discussion: 15. Hazard Will the project result in a risk of explosion, release of hazardous substances or other dangers to public health or safety? - - - !- Discussion: -7- 16. Other (Consider impact on open space or sprawl) Will the project result in other significant effects on the environment? ~ ~ ~ No y: N/A ___L__ Discussion: 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance (A "significant" check on any of the following questions requires preparation of an EIR) a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment? ~-- b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ---~-- c) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ~-- d) Does the project have environmental impacts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ---~- -- Discussion: Local Agency Formation Commission of Contra Costa County McBrien Administration Building, 8th Floor 651 Pine Street Martinez, California 94553 (415) 646-4090 . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..Astrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 17 SUBJECT QUITClAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO ELLSWORTH A. CRAGHOLM, JR. ET UX, JOB 1557, PARCEL 14, LAFAYETTE AREA DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITD~~~i s Hall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: Mr. and Mrs. Cragho1 m, owners of property at 3975 S. Pearda1 e Drive in Lafayette, have requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement. BACKGROUND: The subject easement (five feet in width) was granted to the District in 1950. The easement has been in use since that time. The sewer located within the easement flows southerly, continuing through the adjacent parcels owned by Mr. & Mrs. Warner. During recent reconstruction on the Warner's residence, the public sewer was damaged. An investigation of the damage resulted in the discovery that a portion of the Warner's residence encroached into the existing sewer easement. The solution to this problem is the realignment of the sewer on both the Warner and the Cragho1m parcels. The Cragho1ms have granted a new easement in exchange for the District's replacing their private side sewer and restoring the work area within their property. On completion of the work, the easement covering the original a1 ignment will no longer be needed and can, therefore, be quitclaimed. This project has been eva1 uated by staff and determi ned to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed to Ellsworth A. Cragho1m, et ux, Job 1557, authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded upon completion of the replacement sewer. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JSM RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A-9/85 tOIY DH Ik ww t~N ~<l> YON ,3,-oJ',:RO ..iQ:jI~ 0 I~" a: .. /c~ ~% ~. o~ ~ ,RO S88"/O'W 28.48 CRAGflOlM 84Z4 a~. 508 I I -1 t-S' \ I I Ill) \0 I 1% :::: II~ \ t I~ "- I I~ \...: ~~I I ~'-III ~I !~,r ...... ~ ~ lti ~ ~ Iii \j, \..j~ IJ...... - \:( Il)~ QUITCLAIM EASEMENT S89~/O'W WARNE;e ,P.4/(C.:L ON&? (7Z$B ale. 656) ~ t\l \t\ ~ ,~ ~ II) ~ REPLACEMENT EASEMENT 32.00 - QUITCLAIM EASEMENT Job 1557 - Parcel 14 LAFAYETTE AREA . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF A ril 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 18 f. SUBJECT QUITO-AIM SEWER EASEMENT TO H. ALLYN WARNER, ET UX, JOB 1557, PARCEL 14-A, LAFAYETTE AREA DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITO-AIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ~: Mr. and Mrs. Warner, owners of property at 3970 Los Arabis Drive in Lafayette, have requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement. BACKGROUND: The subject easement (five feet in width) was granted to the District in 1949. The easement has been in use si nce that time. Duri ng the recent reconstruction of the Warner's residence, the public sewer main was damaged. The sewer is being re-aligned to completely clear the Warner's present house. The Warners have granted a new easement to the Di strict for the re-aligned sewer. After the construction of the new sewer, the original easement will no longer be required and can, therefore, be quitclaimed. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOr+tENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed to H. Allyn Warner, et ux, Job 1557, authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded upon completion of the replacement sewer. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A.9/85 DH JSM RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ,tit I'll -~._._-_...._._-_._~_..._-------_..._"_._._-~._.._--~.-_.,-_.,~--~.__.__.~_..__. . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ...,:istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 19 SUBJECT DATE QUITQAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO THOMAS B. FISHER, ET UX, JOB 1564, PARCEL NO. 121, ORINDA AREA March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITQAIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: Mr. and Mrs. Thanas B. Fisher, owners of property at 77 Orchard Road in Orliida, have requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement. BACKGROUND: In February, 1988, Mr. and Mrs. Fisher requested the District to a 11 ow the constructi on of an addi ti on to thei r house over the subj ect easement. The pipe located within the easement was a private side sewer serving the property at No. 75 Orchard Road, owned by Mr. and Mrs. Charles K. Glynn. In November, 1988, Mr. and Mrs. Glynn agreed to the relocation of the private side sewer to withi n an exi sti ng access and util ity easement for No. 75 Orchard Road. The construction of the new private side sewer was completed in February, 1989. All costs for the new private side sewer were borne by Mr. and Mrs. Fisher. Mr. and Mrs. Glynn and subsequent property owners will be responsible for the maintenance of thi s new private si de sewer. The subj ect easement is no longer needed for District purposes and can now be quitclaimed. Thi s proj ect has been eval uated by staff and determi ned to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. REOOMMENDATION: Approve Quitcl aim Deed to Thanas B. Fi sher, et ux, Job 1564, authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. &V ~ 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB CRAGI-IOLM 8424 a R. SOt!J 58<f"IO'W S 88.t.t.' 45" VII I Si\-." (Pw~ WARNER. P.4~CEL CNe (7e~8 (J.~. (,56) QUITCLAIM EASEMENT LOS ARA13/S 52.00 -" REPLACEMENT EASEMENT ~ ~"- 0\ Ii) ~t., ~ ~ ~ 5". 94 -.... S89"/o'W QUITCLAIM EASEMENT Job 1557 - Parcel 14-A LAFAYETTE AREA --_____.__.._____M___.____.__~___________._.__'"___..______..__ .,., ~ I' 2 ~/+ ,)1 ';(1-\ I '~----" 0 R I - + - -.:::" - I """'" ...." I ...........~-1i~ w I , I / ~~ ";~ "; ............... ~ '1ft. 4)4) ., QUITCLAIM EASEMENT Job 1564 - Parcel 121 ORINDA AREA ._------~--<---_.~_."_._. . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ...,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS I PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER I BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 20 SUBJECT QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO PATRICK J. McKILLOP, ET UX, JOB 4005, PARCEL 4, BLACKHAWK AREA DATE March 23, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ill!!E: Mr. and Mrs. McKillop, owners of property at 1130 Eagle Nest Court in Danville, have requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement in exchange for thei r granti ng a private sewer easement to the owner of Lot 1 of Subdivision 6433. BACKGROUND: The subject public easement was granted to the District in 1984. It was intended to be used for the future extension of publ ic sewer service to adjoining properties located south of the McKillop property. This property has since been subdivided into Subdivision 6433. All of Subdivision 6433, except Lot 1, gravity sewers away from the McKillop property. Lot 1 will gravity sewer across the McKillop property. A private side sewer along the McKillop southeast property line is the most economically efficient method of serving Lot 1 and will also eliminate the need of a District-maintained easement sewer. The McKillop's have granted the replacement "private" sewer easement to the owner of Lot 1. The subject public easement is no longer needed for District purposes and can now be quitclaimed. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed to Patrick J. McKillop, et ux, Job 4005, authorize the President of the District Board of Di rectors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ,of fiN JfJfJ \~~z:. 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB I ROGER J. DOLAN ----.--....-------~..._... "-".+-'.'-"'""" -_.".._..__._-,_._._-_....._.~- . ~ ,'-.-. --'-",..-...._- ". "'--"-"<0....",. ........._..0_..____.... .._~._"__.._.,_'____~_,..___.____.__._,~~.__,_~~_______.... 5 \. 8- PUBLIC SEWER v. QUITCLAIM 10' SEWER EASEMENT 3. PL . B- 35Z.", 6 4 5.... .... . ~~ '111 I I I I : I --+---+--i I I;' QUITCLAIM EASEMENT JOB 4005 PARCEL 4 DANVILLE AREA -""'~--___".'__H'___'.___~_.~__""""",_______~____...____ . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary lIJistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF A ril 6, 1989 NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 21 SUBJECT DATE QUITClAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO NORMAN E. BOTTORFF, ET AL, JOB 4011, PARCEL 1, SUBDIVISION 6079, LAFAYETTE AREA March 22, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITClAIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ~: Norman E. Bottorff, et al, owner-developer of Subdivision 6079, has requested the District to quitclaim a portion of the sewer easement which 1 ies within Lot 3 of Subdivision 6079. BACKGROUND: The subject easement was granted to the District in July, 1988. The purpose of the easement is to provide for a future sewer extension to service property located south of Subdivision 6079. Lot 2 of Subdivision 6079 is now bei ng developed. Part of the buil di ng improvements on Lot 2 wil 1 be constructed withi-n the subj ect easement. Di strict staff has determi ned that the easement may be relocated ten feet easterly and still serve its intended purpose. The owner/developer has granted a repl acement easement and has pai d the Di stri ct' s processing fee. Therefore, the subject easement is no longer needed and may be quitcl aimed. This project has been eval uated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Qui tel aim Deed to Norman E. Bottorff, et al, Job 4011, authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION RAB INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Jv( 1302A-9/85 DH JI/1 JSM _._^C_.._.....________,....~_____~.._,~._...___.__..."...'~__.,_'_._.____._"'.._'__.._.__"_.,_._,,____"______.._.. ~ .~ ~~",'" ~. i' , ~ ~ , , -'?t28, #.32'23~?"E /5:7'" ( A/f?'3~'//"'W ............, J',?p';?'.?rE./d,jj(} ~Z 7~''':'':-- ........." "';.........:s:J'57..3~./rE, I 'h::::t '). / II REPLACEtAEtl1' . T EASEtAEN" .~~~:: /1 ~"": Sl . IJ ~ :.:.;.:.:~~~ I~ ~ ~1 I' .~. ~ ~l i:':::;.:;: .~~ / ~. ~ / ~ :':':,-: \ '/ / .~~~~:-: J' S7'.3~ '//.,E.?5.~~' "liT Z (" ~H .?.!?.J S"c:/.8 <SCl7? LtJT3 I' 3d.s- # 2.:v SUB eCl7? QUITCLAIM EASEMENT /I 'ptI~T/4N IJF" .rU8/J11//J'/tlN ~1J7' I Quitclaim Sewer Easement Job 4011 - Parcel 1 La fayette Area . Central .Jontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF SUBJECT 1989 NO. v. DATE CONSENT CALENDAR 22 QUITQAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO RANDALL G. COLO~O, ET UX, JOB 4142, PORTION OF PARCEL 4, LAFAYETTE AR~A March 22 19 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: Mr. and Mrs. Randall G. Colombo, owners of property on Brown Avenue in Lafayette, have requested the District to quitclaim a portion of the subject easement. BACKGROUND: The subject easement was granted to the District in 1987. It was intended to be used for a paved access to the sewer manhole located within the Colombo property. A new easement has been granted to this District across the adjoining property to the northwest of Colombo's property. The new (replacement) easement will be paved as will the portion of the existing access easement within the Colombo property, which is not being quitclaimed. This new alignment . satisfies the District's access requirement while allowing the Colombos to better develop their property. The subject portion of the existing easement is no longer needed for District purposes and can now be quitclaimed. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOM\1ENDATION: Approve Quitcl aim Deed to Randall G. Col ambo, et ux, Job 4142, authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 F DH f#(J JSM RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. l ",t- tl,f1 ./ ,.("t-~~"''I)) /' ~ 0.9- l~ /' 1t),J "JA ",,:~ $ ,0 (1'1)" ~ V Ij.f", I( ~ ~<P',^~~ , tt~b.~t.N6~'50'C . \ V .)Sp ~./~ - --~~. ./ ~~ -< - \ I' 211 ~I r- /0 ~I l:f(:r I. I I FI NDLETOAJ (57IGOR590) / ~', ~'1 / I ................ I I ,I..... . /1/ I I Quitclaim Easement Job 4142 - Portion Parcel 4 La fayette Area . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 April 6, 1989 NO. . v. CONSENT CALENDAR 23 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF SUBJECT QUITClAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO H&M INVESTMENTS, INC., JOB 4342, SUBDIVISION 6743, ALAMO AREA DATE March 24, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITClAIM OF EASEt.t:NT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ~: H&M Investments, Inc., owner-developer of property in the Alamo Area, has requested the District to quitclaim the sewer easement which lies within Parcels "B" and "E" of Subdivision 6743. BACKGROUND: The subject easement was dedicated to the District in June 1987, when the map of Subdivision 6743 was filed. The easement was created to provide sewer service to Parcel "E" of Subdivi si on 6743. Parcel "E" has si nce been subdivi ded, into Subdivison 6885. The al ignment of the sewer system has been changed to conform with the new lot 1 i nes and to avoi d removal of a 1 arge tree. An acceptable replacement easement has been granted to this District. The original easement is no longer needed for District purposes and can now be quitclaimed. The property owner has paid our quitclaim processing fee. This project has been eval uated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitcl aim Deed to H&M Investments, Inc., Job 4342, authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded upon completion of the replacement sewer. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JM RAB 1302A-9/85 ,NIl" DH Yll INITIATING DEPT./DIV. f \ ; - VICINITY MAP N.T.S. ; t^ ,,; ":::"~"=""" . '. ...~..._. ~ .. .....,. tJ.' 1. ~:..", 4,>'fI' Ai"':~ ....v. .;:;>" ..11.:7' 4P~f' ~~ .!ilI" 41~1:'~~ (() 11~:' . y" ~~ ~~ _.o^:~' t; ,y ~T ~, "~'&~:1~F::'0' r,~;...~~+V . ~ ~ .::1,::::11'" 0 ~~.....V h ~.::i::i::' ~~V ~r ~ ~:,:::. '\ V V \' -....... ............. \\ . ..:i,i!i:-:: \ \ '<"~----- --- ;)r-i~':'~ITC~AIM EASEME~; "B" \ 1 ~ I \ /' -,.,,, I ~ ---It! '", '\ I /\ ~// "f '\ .3/ .... r--- ~ ~(\~ SUB 6743 QUITCLAIM EASEMENT Sub 6743 - Job 4342 Alamo Area . Central --,antra Costa Sanitary ...,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION BOARD MEETING OF A ril 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 24 PAGE 1 OF 3 PAPER SUBJECT AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 89-9 (ALAMO) AND P.A. 89-10 (MARTINEZ) TO BE INClUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT DATE March 21, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR PROCESSING SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division Parcel No. Owner, Address Parcel No. & Acrea e Remarks Area 89-9 Evel yn J. Phel ps 2334 Stone Valley Road Alamo CA 94507 193-140-006 (1.052 AC) Property to be split into two lots. Two new homes are proposed. I Negative Declaration by Contra Costa County. Alamo (78B3 ) 89-10 Martinez ( 44C3 ) Davidon Homes Future Subdivision 6942, 1600 S. Main St., Ste.150 I having 55 single family Walnut Creek CA 94596 lots. Property is 164-010-007 (44.48 AC) included in the Alhambra Hills' specific plan and EIR. The city of Martinez has approved this development. I I I I I I I I Contra Costa County City of Ma rti nez RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 89-9 and PA 89-10 to be included in a future formal annexation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. tJJP 1302A-9/85 &rY DH JSM RAB v-- ALA.MO ,."ottEftTfES co 13t. 3'1 .,,' 100 il 80 AC ) 9. 1360 AC P.A.89-9 _____~_. .____...llL__.. L~.l. , . III ..... .., .. . ., . , MARTU 11.14 AC '~~l ,. ~,. ~~'I""" i"~I.l"i"I"" /ll:l..l..l. "'I I~DIlr" ~.ln7 {~ . ,,- -- ,\ ~:~:~ "/~ r. . ' "'~~O). ,n ", ~.~ " 2n. CT tlO 9- '" . ~ jiJ II , '1~ ~~...<. ~ '0' t.2.,. "' II V,... ~ ... "T ... ~.... ~j"l.i"i ~ ~'..~." ,ea , 1.'" .- '" ~ 4.._ ii tLLI U. '~ # .0. ....N. 211'" \.. o . ~ , 10 ~'1~. ," .. ....(..1~ y< ..~.. 1\ lOt 'l: .,.~ I \.l2f . A.I _ ,.. ,.. I .1"" \ 101 " I M I_II ti. '0::;::" '" IT 1t~1OO 3 5 5 6 ... ~ A.I / ~ ,., '~.c ..., zoJ p: II" '" ,.. ,.~ II .. ~~, ,," 0 ~ .51 .....~" ., ':0 II: la4 I'T :'V.. 10 T ~ 0 UI ~ t! ~, ..0 ., 'n"~,,. ' . v :\. ~f': . II III II ~ . \ dl ::i:., II .. II. ( .,: · .' ~ II II ~~ J!O~ ~ \ !!! ~ \ \... .,;" iT: .ii: '~. ". II ".0 " \~.. '-"fOO rfL 'n ~'i . '" ,.. It II~ ,I, ~.' .. '.~'" Ii II, ;. ~ · . 11 " 41" ....-::\.. ~ ..)... ~ I "^~. '"( J ~ ~ ~ . \11 51 .~ ....#' "./. ..i', 'Y~./~~" >-m~t. · ~ '. ~ glOl ~~~~.. .:~ ~.:~,~~ ~~'!~ ~ ~.:" "0 ~ ~ II.. ~i ~ \ ~::"oo.."""" ..~ II ~ ....~'l. ~~! ~ 'Ol'~ ~~%~~~ r:. \~,~ (; ~~-~~ ~8 ,\~ "IAYE" 00 II ". I ...~' ~'" .... ,+ " ....AC 'OULI &1.100.. \.. ANNEX ) .< +. .... ". " II " '- ~ I . ..1 ~ /.. ~ ~~ 7, AY "SUB~~\fA ~~" '<4', _ \ ill !509<<'~' D ~ C ~'r-~~"'I ~,~ "I 498 ,~.. y~, .. 1- .,. "1:... . 'I 'OAe PftU_.IT1 ...JOle WIUTrR 41.... AC. ,. 0 ~ 10 ~ ~... 0, I 2 ."'... +.. (.~ 2 - . .:... -...... i,' .' ;", -' ,"ll;\\\t:V, ~" ;,:,~~ ~ ,,^, ~. ~ , / A I ~ / IS / ,I'. .. " I 10 . " /I ~ ~ WEITEIII TIT..1 110. IT AC ,'/ "\'" ,,,,to sM;.... ...- J . ~. ":':'~- .,pA....0. 'fS'~A"" 14 -' S" II i'Z4Io' @{ ~.t~ !2:i~l ASl4/J'l "i'i'1 '-l ~O'r e ~~. '21 ~ o. 8-1 - .. ~z 15 5~'" ~. 15 CD, · 10 41 \:.. .. ' , '.1 SUI .141 ... .ol~'b~\~ '{~ \4 ~6:: \.l- X' r"~ ~~., [..\.. II G I ., ~I ~ ~ l!.-,..: ~~,. ,.1 ,'0 .. "0' rs. .. 'l"L ., ' .I:!".... "')'-0.'''>> .~~ e. 'f /.. ~/~ ;0. ... . I" '0.: ~~, ~.. /~ ...(!;~'" I '. ~ ~~ ,. lee,. ~ 0'; / 1 ;.~~. ~~i7~ "f n' "~~~P~-&t.. <-'. "'::'Q-..~).L ~ ~.. / fronT ,'V'11".1 rr ,~'jl~ I ~ ,," j / <:' II I AI '-""T .. '.u: "'. ,. 37 I .. \ \~ l~ r.~~j 11 'n 11 . ra.1 \ II '" hJ A ,.LJHI .'4' '" _ r~. II ,,~ · ~ · I L21 .. 'J:Vj II ,1. ,.. S' c. - ~. " I '" I .. " '0 V Ii' .. A CI II 4ul 41 ~ 001 I I I ~ I .,j, r "S~ .t'~ ~.o ,.. ",. v . V , 4'f I L 1"1 \.... I.....l'~ _11'1 7" 11~.1all 1~'1.I!' .... II ,011,. U - / / ' , ~IW~l"'l~ r~ .0.0 89,/ ~~...... ~^'~..JI ,....'\"/).... ~.. ::t)..<f:-'-".J....+J ~~'O 'II 15 ~ Ij ,- .~ ~~ " Nt · .. ...... ,1:1 PROPOSED ANNEXATION 1 "'yo""",,o 0 2t" ~. .11 UB, ~B~Z \.\. 10 ' IS !O O(VC)H "'4 II At IT' >-~'- ;b 11.1 .. ~L z~..1'!Zs ,\.' Al' .0 ~ &tl~~ j. ~~ '<: 228 ~?-1' \ ~'-';\~ II e.zzO? ~~. IV' . 11~!'lI:r'm ~ - -I" ,; '00 · , lfl'o'^ ~',. lO.' "! >, .. - ,l: "~".. ",,+~$~ l22 c;l. C ~.. ') ~(l':t ~ "': C AL C~ , 3L cl. ".:..L' .> ~~~ ~. ~;~T1s"u~':u] ~', · · ~\.J~(i,r~' ,. ~ \ ~ ~ ~ I ". rtI I I I>l (0 · I /8, e~ - 1 It ". "" ' II: II .. IOl .~ / 4 I \ )0 ... , .. "\ -;; I 'n \\\, o~ M AIf'A ,ts .... , A "~' .. \~'fA'f t'l) t.. 41 '~..~~ . .~~E~ rfrn~ .,,: ~ ;~'lt.01 . ./' II J -!lltt:~'.... ..:. .... ,~'J · .0 ~, ~7-~\:'::.:;r;:\ SU B .. J\ B :'>T~Y \:::'.:i::;:'::-:::' 4692 . 4' 10 l~ ~7 ......:::. ". A IS O. ~ 1 4 4 , . , I ~> .: '0 +0 I . .~ , II ~ ~ / / / / . ,~ f 8~3 41 41 t .. z" P.A. 89.10 11C It .1 ".'O ~. . It I.J I~ " 'lJ(ollr 7, ;')3 - . Centra. ':ontra Costa Sanitary .-listrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 25 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE DEPARllIfNT OF GENERAL SERV ICES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PURa-tASE NINE VEHIQES FOR THE DISTRICT DATE Ma rch 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Ken Roan, V&E Maintenance Supervisor Collection System Operations Department ISSUE: Board Authorization is required by the State of California prior to purchasing under the state's contract. BACKGROUND: Each year the State of California solicits public bids for automobiles and trucks to meet their operating needs. The bids are solicited fran potential suppliers by area within the state and, for a minor fee, other government agenci es can purchase vehicl es under the state's contract at the price submitted by the lowest responsible bidder. The prices are below the local competitive market due to the large volume of vehicles being purchased. Additionally, purchasing vehicles through the state contract saves the District the cost and labor involved in soliciting bids. The Board approved the purchase of el even vehicl es as part of the 1988/89 Equipment Budget. Nine of the vehicles are available through the state's Cooperative Purchase Program. They are: 3 Four-Door Compact Sedans; 5 Small Pickup Trucks; and 1 One-Ton Cab and Chassis. These vehicles can be purchased for $101,290 under the state contract which is within the allocation in the 1988/89 Equipment Budget. REcotIENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Department of General Services of the State of Cal iforni a to purchase ni ne vehicl es for the District. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION u/\/ 1302A-9/85 KR JL RESOL UTION NO. A RESCl.UTION AUTHORIZING THE DEPARThENT OF GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CAL IFORNIA TO PUROiASE NINE VEHIO-ES BE IT RESCl.VED: That the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District does hereby authorize the Office of Procurement, State Department of General Services of the State of California to purchase the following 1989 model year vehicles. 3 Four-Door Compact Sedans 5 Small Pickup Trucks lOne-Ton Cab and Chassis BE IT FURTHER RESCl.VED THAT: These vehicles are to be purchased for and on the behalf of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District pursuant to Section 14814 Government Code, and that the Purchasi ng Officer is hereby authorized and di rected to si gn and del iver all necessary requests and other documents in connection therewith for and on behalf of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Central Contra Costa Sani ta ry Di stri ct Boa rd of Directors this 6th day of April, 1989, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members: Members: Members: President of the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary of the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California Approved as to Form: District Counsel . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary _'istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER PAGE 1 OF 1 NO. 1989 V. CONSENT CALENDAR 27 DATE March 30, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE SUBJECT SET MAY 4, 1989, AS lHE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON lHE ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH lHE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM SUBMITTED BY Jarred Miyamoto-Mills Senior En ineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Planning Division ISSUE: A date for a public hearing on the ordinance to establish the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System needs to be set. BACKGROUND: An ordi nance to establi sh the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System has been prepared. Prior to adoption of the ordinance, it is appropriate to solicit and receive comments from the public. REOOMMENDATION: Set May 4, 1989, as the date for a public hearing on the ordinance to establish the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 JMM JMK RJ1B INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. 1/ 5fVl Ie fJfl . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..Astrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 28 SUBJECT DATE March 31, 1989 SET' MAY 4, 1989, AS 'mE IWm F"<R A PUBLIC IIEARDG TO ADOPl' ARTICLE 4 OF 'mE DIS'DUCl' <IDE TYPE OF ACTION PF.R&RmL SUBMITTED BY- Paul Marsen, Deprt:y General .Manager INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Mni.nist:ra.tive Department ISSUE: A date tor a public hearing to adopt revisions to Article 4 of the District Code. IWI{GR()(H): An ordinance to adopt the proposed revl.Sl.ons to Article 4 of the District Code has been prepared. Prior to adoption of the changes, it is appropriate to solicit and receive camrents from the public. ~CE: Set May 4, 1989, as the date for a public hearing on the adoption of revisions to Article 4 of the District Code. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 13{2A-9/85 PM .____~_,__~..'~m.'_._",_~..~.,,_~_,_.____.._._ .' . _'__"'_""'.'__.'" .._'...._~_._,."... _'''_''_~_'~''''_''_''''~_'__ "... .____'_.._.__."'m.___'_.._____.___~.,____.._,_~___~"_______._.._u_._____ ..e,. __,__.,_.__._______.__________.~___ . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ...,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 29 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF $2,560 FROM THE EQUIPMENT CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A WORD PROCESSING SYSTEM FOR THE ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION Division Mana er Department Division ISSUE: Board approval is required for equipment purchases not inc luded in the annual Equipment Budget and costing greater than $1,000. BACKGROUND: In the normal course of preparing plans and specifications, the Engineering Division must interface with outside consul tants as well as other governmental organizations. Often situations arise in which all or a portion of the District's specifications must be melded with the specifications prepared by an outside entity. The vast majority of consultants and public agencies with whom the District interfaces use IBM compatible operating systems for their word processing. Since the District uses Sony word processing, which is not compatible with IBM, Engineering Division secretaries are faced with the time consuming task of retyping and/or cutting and pasting in order to meld outside documents, particularly specifications, with District documents. The Sony/IBM incompatibility also eliminates the use of commonly available programs designed to save time. Over the past three years, the Engineering Division has expended a considerable effort in developing a Master Specification for Engineering projects. Project managers use the Master Specification as the base specification for all projects. The project managers then tailor the Master Specification to suit the needs of their individual project. Prior to bidding the project, the project managers review the final project specification to ensure that only authorized changes were made to the Master Specification and that the changes are consistent and appropriate. This final review is time consuming because the two documents must be compared side by side. This task could be done faster and more accurately by using anyone of several inexpensive difference programs whose function is to highlight differences between documents. Again, the problem arises in that the differences programs are IBM compatible and will not work on the Sony word processing system. To alleviate the compatibility problem, the Engineering Division proposes to purchase an inexpensive IBM compatible word processing system for use by the Engineering Division secretaries. The cost of the word processing system is $2,560. It would be beneficial to purchase the system now rather than wait for approval of the Equipment Budget, since several projects which could benefit from the system will be bid before the end of the fiscal year. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION I VA:;T.lDI V m 1302A-9/85 DRW RAB SUBJECT AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF $2,560 FROM THE EQUIPMENT CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A WORD PROCESSING SYSTEM FOR THE ENGINEERING DIVISION POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 2 DATE April 3, 1989 The District is currently investigating upgrading the entire word processing system since Sony no longer manufactures word processing equipment and, thus service and parts are getting difficul t to obtain. The Engineering Division 's system could thus provide first hand information on the benefits offered by an IBM system. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize allocation of $2,560 from the Equipment Contingency Account for the purchase of an IBM compatible word processing system for use by the Engineering Division secretaries. _,I ~ .. 13028-9/85 . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 30 SUBJECT DATE April 3, 1989 AUTHORIZE THE ENGINEERING DIVISION TO HIRE A REPLACEMENT FOR A RETIRING SENIOR ENGINEERING ASSISTANT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE HIRE Division Mana er Department Division ISSUE: Board authorization is required to hire a new employee pending the retirement of an existing employee. BACKGROUND: A Sr. Engineering Assistant in the Engineering Division became ill in July 1988 and was forced to be on sick leave for an extended period of time. On several occasions over the past 'nine months, the employee had planned on returning to work but suffered relapses and was unable to return to work except for a five-day period in August 1988. In January 1989, the District received notice that the employee had been classified as medically disab1ed.by his doctor. The employee subsequently applied for retirement. His retirement documents are being processed at this time. The Senior Engineering Assistant provided valuable assistance to the engineers on capital project designs. During his absence, the Division contracted with a technical service agency to provide a temporary engineering assistant. The temporary engineering assistant has indicated he will be leaving the first of April. The Engineering Division is now facing a heavy workload as the upcoming construction season draws near. Since the employee's official retirement will not take place for several months, the Engineering Division proposes to immediately begin recruitment to fill the Senior Engineering Assistant's position. This proposal has been discussed with the Board Personnel Committee and will not cause the Engineering Division to exceed its budget for Account 012 (Salaries and Wages Non-Management) . RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Engineering Division to hire a replacement for a Senior Engineering Assistant while processing of his retirement is ongoing. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INI~l;I;;JT./DIV. pffP 1302A-9/85 DRW RAB . Centra.. ~ontra Costa Sanitar) Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETAp1-~~ 6, 1989 s~PT RESOLUTION CXM4ITTING CENTRAL CON1RA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT TO CUIf3SIDE RECya-ING NO. VI. SOLID WASTE 1 DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ADOPT RESOLUTION SUBMITTED BY Paul Morsen. Deputy General Manager INITIATING DEPT/DIV A~1n1strat1ve Department ISSUE: Oakland Scavenger Company proposes to expand existing landfill operati ons at A1 tamont Sanitary Landfill to accommodate munici pal sol id waste from Contra Costa County over a two year period. BACKGROUND: As a condition of accepting out-of-County municipal solid waste, Alameda County will require exporting counties to match the existing level of recycling in Alameda County, to establish goals and an implementation schedule that equals or exceeds those in the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Plan, and to keep pace with programs that are implemented in Alameda County over time. As a franchiser of solid waste in the proposed importation area, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District should provide evidence to Alameda County of our commitment to fu1 fill thei r recyc1 i ng miti gati on requi rements. Based on the District's existing curbside recycling programs and those being implemented within the next year, it is expected that the District will surpass Alameda County's mitigation requirements. The attached resolution underscores the District's commitment to curbside recyc-l ing and shows good faith evidence of meeting Alameda County's recycling goal requirements as set forth in their County Solid Waste Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a reso1 uti on committi ng Central Contra Costa Sani tary District to curbside recycling. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9~5 PM RESOLUTION NO. 89- RESOLUTION COMMITTING CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT TO CURBSIDE RECYClING WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District is vitally concerned with the problems associated with sol id waste and sol id waste disposal in central Contra Costa County; and WHEREAS, the increasing volume and variety of solid wastes being generated are depleting natural resources and contributing to the deterioration of the environment; and WHEREAS, recycl ing can remove items from the wastestream before they are landfilled, burned, or composted, thus increasing the life of landfills; and WHEREAS, the most effective recycl i ng programs nati onw ide have been curbside recycl ing with establ ished programs showing participation rates of over 50 percent; and WHEREAS, maximum recycl i ng is necessary to mi nimize export quantiti es to out-of-County 1 andfill s and to maximize the 1 He of any landfill sited within Contra Costa County; and WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District has coordinated the formation of a Regional Recycling Advisory Committee to develop and impl ement recycl i ng programs throughout the citi es and uni ncorporated areas in which we franchise refuse collection; and WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Board of Directors has approved the implementation of a pilot curbside recycling program for 3600 homes in Al arno, Danvill e and Lafayette begi nni ng March 8, 1989, to be expanded to all single-family residences over a six-month period starting on or about July 1, 1989; has approved a full-scale COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary of the Central 'Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California Approved as to Form:, James L. Haz ard Oi strict Counsel . Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitar~ ')istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 19 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEE1AIj)<tlf~ 6, 1989 NO. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE 1 DATE March 31, 1989 SUBJECT CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PlAN ADV ISORY COMMITTEE ON THE RENEW AL CONTRACT PROPOSED BY GREAT WESTERN BANK TO SERVE AS CO-ADMINISTRATOR OF THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN TYPE OF ACTION CONTRACT RENEWAL SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT/DIV. Administrative ISSUE: A new three-year renewal contract has been negotiated with Great Western Bank (Great Western) to succeed the present three-year contract for services as co-administrator of the District's Deferred Compensation Plan, which expires on April 30, 1989. BACKGROUND: In 1986, the Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee recommended to the Board of Directors the selection of Great Western as an alternative co-administrator of the Deferred Compensation Plan. Upon execution of a three-year contract with Great Western for the period May 1, 1986 through April 30, 1989, District participants in the Deferred Compensation Plan were provided the al ternative of sel ecti ng either the Great Western program or the pre-exi sti ng Hartford Life Insurance Company (Hartford) program. The majority of participants in deferred compensation plan programs, including District participants, select the savings account option over the equity account options to assure safety of principal. Since its implementation three years ago, the Great Western program has been highly successful in attracting participants, and now includes the vast majority of District participants as current contributors. The primary reasons for the sel ecti on of the Great Western program by the maj ority of District participants have been the following: The Great Western savings account provided a guaranteed minimum interest rate of 10 percent for the entire three-year term of the present contract; with interest compounded monthly, the effective annual yield was 10.62 percent. The Hartford savings account interest rate averaged 8.88 percent during the same three-year period. No fees were charged by Great Western in administering the savings account option. Hartford assesses a withdrawal fee of 3 percent of the amount withdrawn from the savings account, if the withdrawal period is less than th ree years. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTIO INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ~ SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PlAN ADV ISORY COMMITTEE ON THE RENEW AI.. CONTRACT PROPOSED BY GREAT WESTERN BANK TO SERVE AS (X}-A[).tINISTRATOR OF THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PlAN PAGE 2 OF DATE March 31, 1989 19 The Deferred Compensati on Pl an Adv isory Committee analyzed the proposed renewal contract, met with an official of Great Western to obtain terms more favorable to Di strict parti ci pants, and prepared the Committee's report which is presented as Attachment I. The major changes between the present and renewal contracts with Great Western are the focus of the Committee's report and are descri bed in detail. A general description of these changes follows: - Instead of a fixed interest rate, the Great Western savings account rate of interest will be established quarterly and shall yield the over-the-counter yield quotation for the five year United States Government Treasury Note, as set at the end of each calendar quarter; this yield will be guaranteed for the succeeding calendar quarter. The five-year Treasury Note yield as of March 30, 1989 was 9.65 percent, and establ ishes the savings account interest rate for May and June 1989. - Two no-load mutual funds and two annuity accounts will be added to the three mutual fund accounts available in the present contract. - Fees will be assessed by Great Western in the following amounts: o an annual administration fee of $10 per participant o a transfer fee of $25 for transfer of an account balance, or any portion of an account, to another administrator, such as Hartford. o a transaction charge of $1 per transaction for contributions to a no-load mutual fund; if funds are transferred to a no-load mutual fund from another account, a $10 fee will be assessed. The Committee's report concludes with a recommendation that the renewal contract be executed for a th ree-year term by the Board of Di rectors, as the Great Western program continues to provide a competitive alternative for the District's participants in the Deferred Compensation Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee recommends that a new three-year contract effective May I, 1989 be executed with Great Western Bank for services as co-administrator of the District's Deferred Compensation Plan. 13028-9/85 Attachment I Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee REPORT ON PROPOSED GREAT WESTERN BANK RENEWAL CONTRACT Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee: Walter Funasaki - Finance Officer Helen Baumgartner - Administrative Department Bart Brandenburg - Engineering Department Ginnie Gerber - Collection System Operations Department Matthew Mahoney - Plant Operations Department Apri 1 1989 . -~---------"-"-------'-'"--'--'--"~'--'-""'--'-~'-'-'_'"_'__"""~'.'_----_.._---,"----,.~--,._-_._---,--~-.-.-.....--..--.---,..-....-..-..-....-.-.---...---.-..-..---.--..-----------. REPORT ON PROPOSED GREAT WESTERN BANK RENEWAL. CONTRACT In~roduct1on In 1976, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District voluntarily withdrew from the federal Social Security System and established a Deferred Compensati on Pl an under Secti on 457 of the Internal Revenue Code. The District's employer contributions, which were formerly made to employees' Soci al Security accounts, were contri buted instead to the new ly established Deferred Compensation Plan. The District appointed Hartford Life Insurance Company (Hartford) as the Deferred Compensation Plan administrator in 1978. As provided for in the Plan administration contract, Hartford enrolls participants, provides investment options, accounts for contri buti ons and Pl an assets, reports account status to participants, and disburses funds to retired or terminated participants, or their beneficiaries. To facilitate the District's internal administration of the Plan, a Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee (Committee), operati ng under the gui dance of the Di strict Finance Officer, was established by the Board of Directors on January 28, 1982 . Based on an extensive review of other available administration contracts conducted in 1986, the Committee recommended that the Board of Directors approve the selection of Great Western Bank (Great Western) as an alternative, co-administrator of the Deferred Compensation Plan. In making its recommendation, the Committee stated: "Great Western's lower fees and charges, noteworthy investment performance, and extensive client base in the public sector, will provide District participants a highly competi tive al ternative pl an admini strator." The Board executed a three-year contract with Great Western for the period May 1, 1986 through April 30, 1989. District participants were thereby provided an option of selecting either the Hartford or Great Western programs for their monthly deferred compensation contribution. Great Western has offered for consideration by the District a renewal contract for a th ree-year peri od begi nni ng May 1, 1989. Over the 1 ast five months, the Committee carefully reviewed the proposed renewal contract and met with an official of Great Western to obtain revisions to certain contract provisions. This report describes the major changes between the ori gi nal and renewal contract, and the Committee's recommendations regarding the renewal contract. Or1g1nal Oon~ract Prov1s1ons The attached chart summarizes the significant provisions of the original Great Western contract and the proposed renewal contract in a comparative format; the Hartford contract provisions are also presented. The provisions of the original Great Western contract which should be noted are the following: 1 o General Account (Savings Account) Interest Rate of 10 Percent Guaranteed for the Three-Year Term of the Contract Under the original contract, the interest rate was established monthly based on whichever one of the following indices that results in the highest interest rate payable: A. The rate of interest in effect on the last business day of the calendar month for ninety (90) day market rate accounts at Great Western. B. A rate of interest determined on the last business day of each calendar month equal to the one hundred eighty (180) day United States Government Treasury Bill di scount rate, as set by the last Treasury Bill auction held before the last business day of the month, plus twenty-five (25) basis points. C. Ten (10) percent per annum. Duri ng the enti re three-year term of the origi nal contract, the guaranteed minimum rate of 10 percent was paid. Based on the reinvestment of interest monthly, the minimum effective annual yield was 10.62 percent. o Absence of Great Western Fees on General Account or Equity Accounts Under the original contract, no administrative, transfer, or transacti on fee of any ki nd was charged by Great Western on fund contributions in the General Account or Equity Accounts. o Three Eauitv (Mutual Fund) Accounts Under the original contract, the following two stock and one bond mutual fund accounts of American Funds Services Company were provided as available options: Investment Company of America Growth Fund of America Bond Fund of America Review of Renewal Contract Provisions The provisions of the original contract described in the preceding secti on are changed si gni ficantly in the proposed renewal contract. These changes are described in this section. o General Account (Savings Account) Interest Rate to be Based on the Yield of the Five Year United States Government Treasurv Note Under the proposed contract, the interest rate will be established quarterly based on whichever one of the following indices that results in the highest interest rate payable: 2 - .-.--.---------.-.~-.-.,....~-.,~ - -,.........._. -..-.,,' . - -" '-'~_._'-'-_._--'^'-~"'-----'.".""'" .,-.......--.,....----~.--,--~,..~-"-.....-_._.."__,~ ' . ...."..__....._...._...... '".__.__._..____.,~__._ ... __"__"__"..,_,_.~_.___'m'~.... _._._______.___.__,,_~_,,_"" A. The rate of interest shall yiel d the over-the-counter yiel d quotation for the five year United States Government Treasury Note, as set forth on the day before the last business day of each calendar quarter. This yield will be guaranteed for the succeeding calendar quarter regardless of any subsequent change in the five year United States Treasury Note yield during that quarter. B. The rate of interest in effect for the preferred money market rate accounts of $10,000 or greater at Great Western. The yield for the five year Treasury Note as of March 30, 1989 was 9.65 percent and establi shes the sav i ngs account interest rate for May and June 1989; the Great Western preferred money market rate is currently 7.50 percent. Interest w 111 accrue daily, will be credited monthly, and will be automatically reinvested to provide for monthly compounding. o Impositi on of Great Western Fees on General Account and Equity Accounts Under the proposed contract, the following fees will be assessed by Great Western on the General Account and Equity Accounts, whereas no such fees are assessed under the original contract. A. Administrative Fee - An annual administrative fee of $10 per participant in the Plan will be deducted quarterly from the General Account balance; all participants must establish a General Account for this purpose. B. Transfer Fee Other than at admi ni strative contract with Great $25 will be assessed if all, or Account or Equity Accounts is administrator, such as Hartford. the termination of the Western, a transfer fee of any part, of the General transferred to another c. "No-load" Mutual Fund Fee - If a pa rti ci pant invests in a "no-load" mutual fund, i.e., where no sales commission is charged, a fee of $1 per transacti on w ill be assessed. If a parti ci pant transfers funds from any investment opti on other than a "no-load" mutual to a "no-l oad" mutual fund, a $10 fee will be assessed. The two Fidel ity Investment mutual funds described in the next section are "no-load" mutual funds. o Seven Equity (Mutual Fund and Annuity) Accounts Under the proposed contract, two mutual fund and two annuity accounts will be added to the three mutual fund accounts available under the original contract: 3 CurrentlY Available Accounts Sponsor Mutua 1 Funds: Name of Fund American Funds Services Company Investment Company of America Growth Fund of America Bond Fund of America Additional Accounts Sponsor Name of Fund Mutual Funds: Fidelity Investments Freedom Fund High Income Fund Annuities: Jackson National Life Insurance Company Flexible Premium Annuity III-A Super Max Plan Single Premium Annui ty Committee Analysis The Committee performed a del iberate and careful review of the changes included in the renewal contract initially proposed by Great Western. Over the course of a five-month period, the Committee prepared a comparative summary of the major prov isi ons of the present and renewal contract, met with Richard C. Gedymin, Vice President, Regional Manager of Deferred Compensation at Great Western, to obtain modifications to the i niti ally proposed renewal contract, and analyzed the effects of the th ree maj or areas of change in order to produce a Committee recommendation on the renewal contract. The Committee's analysis of the three major areas of change - an indexed quarterly interest rate; imposition of fees by Great Western; and the addition of four new investment accounts - is described in the following sections. Interest Rate ChanQe As indicated by the following summary as of February 28, 1989, the preponderance of District participants' funds in the Great Western program is in the savings account. Savings Account Amount $4,020,010 % 90 .25 Mutual Funds: Growth Fund of America Investment Company of America Bond Fund of America 239,838 191,291 3,753 $4,454,892 5.38 4.29 .08 100.00 4 The change in the method of computing interest on the savings account from a guaranteed rate of 10 percent to one based on the yield of the five year Treasury Note set at the end of each quarter will have the greatest effect on District participants. The Committee compared the five year Treasury Note yield during the last eleven years with the average interest rate paid on the Hartford savings account. The comparison is shown below. Five Vear Treasury Note Viel d Hartford Savings Account Interest Rate 1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1 1 8.321 9.52111.48114.24113.01110.80 112.24110.13 7.31 7.94 8.72 I 7.50 I 8.00 I 9.75 111.50 112.50 111.55 111.25 I 9.96 I 9.63 I 8.50 I 8.85 I I I I I I I I I I I I I While the eleven-year period includes years in which interest rates were driven to unusually high levels by the federal government's monetary policies to curb inflation, it is significant to note the foll ow i ng: o In seven of the eleven years, the five year Treasury Note yield exceeded the Hartford interest rate. o In six of the eleven years, the five year Treasury Note yield exceeded 10 percent. In a review of features of deferred compensation programs of other administration firms, the Committee determined that a rate based on the five year Treasury Note yield would be competitive. Great Western has established a company policy to renew all expiring contracts using a standardized interest rate and fee basis consistent with that contained in the contract proposed to the District. The Committee confirmed that the State of California with 40,000 participants and nearly $1 billion in invested funds has been offered a renewal contract which provides for an interest rate change identical to the change reviewed in this section. The renewal contract with the Di strict will contai n a provisi on that will make any more favorable terms, which may be negotiated in Great Western's standard renewal contract with others, automatically available to the District's contract. Great Western Fees Great Western contends that the imposition of the $10 annual administration fee per participant, the $25 fee for transfers to another administrator, and the $1 and $10 transaction charge for investments in, and transfers to, a no-load mutual fund, respectively, were necessary to defray administrative expenses; no-load mutual funds do not have sales commissions which would normally be received by Great Western. 5 The Committee attempted to eliminate fees from the renewal contract, but was only partially successful in reducing the annual administration fee to $10 from $12. While the assessment of fees where none existed before is onerous, the Committee bel ieves that the nature and amount of the new fees are not unreasonable. The assessment of an annual administration fee of $10 is not uncommon among other administration companies surveyed by the Committee; Hartford assesses a $10 annual fee on the equity account participants only. The $25 fee to transfer funds to Hartford, which seldom occurs, is to reimburse the expense of preparing and mailing the transfer check to Hartford. The participants who select the new no-load mutual funds will incur comparatively nominal transacti on fees, but avoi d sal es charges of as much as 2.5 percent for other mutual funds. Four Additional Investment Accounts The addition of four new investment accounts to the three accounts under the present contract will improve the Great Western program by expanding the investment alternatives provided to participants. Two of the four new accounts are a stock and a bond mutual fund of Fidelity Investments, a firm which manages some of the most successful mutual funds in the nation. The Committee reviewed the investment performance of the Fidelity Freedom Fund and the Fidelity High Income Fund compared to market indexes and the three mutual funds in the present contract. The comparative summary, which shows an impressive long-term performance history for both new funds, follows: COMPARATIVE REVIEW OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE Percent Gafn or (Loss) Sept. ONE FIVE TEN CATEGORY 1988 YEM YEARS YEARS MARKET INDEXES Dew Jones Industrfals 12.1 U5.5) 110.6 303.1 Standard & Poor's 500 13.1 U2.4) 98.7 319.1 Solomon Brothers Bond Index 7.2 13.4 81.7 Shearson Lehman Treasury Index 6.0 12.0 75.7 186.5 ~ Growth Fund of Amerfca GRO 16.8 ( 5.0) 75.3 423.5 Investment Co. of Amerfca G&I 11.2 ( 9.7) 105.2 346.9 t1ffclelft;y F~ Fund MAX 16.4 U3.0) 95.8 ~ Bond Fund of Amerfca tGC 9.7 15.3 85.0 199.0 t1fic1elft;y High Inca.e Fund HYC 10.7 10.0 88.0 2Z7 .2 · Funds noted fn bold face are new funds offered by Great Western. GOO - Growth, G&I - Growth and Income, MAX - Maxfmum Capftal Gaf ns tGC - Hf~h Grade Corporates, HYC - HIgh Yfeld Corporates 6 ,....' - -. _.._-"+-'_.-.~.,...__.._,_.._._-~--,--_.._._,--_..~...-"-'-"-'-~-'---"--"--""--'-'-'-"'"'-'-"--'------,''''--''--'--'-"'--'--'~.'--_._....-. ..,~._"-----_....__._._--,._.. The other two new accounts are annuity accounts of Jackson National Life Insurance Company. The two annuity accounts are essentially interest-bearing savings accounts offered by a life insurance company that may be converted upon reti rElllent to an annuity, which is a stream of payments over a lifetime or specified period. Features of the two annuity accounts are summarized in the chart below. The Super Max Plan Single PrElllium annuity may be used only for lump sum premium payments, while the Flexible PrElllium III-A may receive periodic prElllium payments of varying amounts. JACKSON NATIONAL LIFE NKIm OPTION FEAlURES SUPER MAX PlAN FLEXIBLE III-A TYPE OF PlAN Single PrElllium Flexible PrElllium SURRENDER CHAAGES Year 1 91 Year 1 Interest Only 2 8 2 Interest Only 3 7 3 11 .. 6 .. 9 5 5 5 7 6 .. 6 6 7 3 7 5 8 2 8 .. 9 1 9 2 10+ 0 10 1 11+ 0 CURRENT INTEREST RATE 9.25J, 5.0J Minimum 9.25J, 3.OJ Minimum guaranteed for the guaranteed for the life of the contract life of the contract WITHDRAWAL FEATURE 101 of accumulated None allowed without val ue with no surrender charge surrender charge Waived in the event SURRENDER CHAAGE Waived in the event of of death, disability, WAIVER of death, disability, or hardsh i p or hardship None (waived for Great MINIMUM CONTRIBUTION $2,000 Western's Deferred Compensation Plan; normally $750) None (waived for Great ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE None Western's Deferred CHAAG E Compensation Plan; normally $20 if annual contribution is less than $1,000) 7 Jackson National Life Insurance Company is a subsidiary of Prudenti al Corporati on, the 1 argest insurer in the Uni ted Ki ngdom, and has a rating of A+ (superior) fran A. M. Best, an insurance industry rating company. Consumer Reports, in a review of more than 80 annuity programs offered by insurance compani es conducted in January 1988, ranked the Jackson National program in the top category of its rating. COmmittee Recommendations The Committee recommends the renewal of the Great Western contract for a three-year term effective May 1, 1989 for the following reasons: o Based on the Committee's analysis of the effects of the changes in the renewal contract, and a review of other available contracts, it is concluded that the overall Great Western program still remains highly competitive, considering financial strength, investment performance, fees and charges, and quality of administration. o The use of the five year Treasury Note yiel d to establish the savings account interest rate quarterly provides for a publ ished yield which is verifiable and upon which interest rate adjustments will be made on a current and schedul ed frequency. The March 30, 1989 five year Treasury Note yiel d of 9.65 percent, which establishes the savings account rate for May and June 1989, exceeds the rate available from other qualified administration firms surveyed. A retrospective comparison over the past eleven years indicated that the five year Treasury Note yiel d exceeded the Hartford interest rate in most years. o The amount and nature of the fees to be assessed by Great Western are not unreasonabl e. Of the new fees imposed, the maj ority of participants are likely to incur only the $10 annual administration fee. o The four new investment accounts are of superior quality in terms of past investment performance and the high standing of the sponsoring companies in their industries. The Committee recommends that District participants be advised of the changes in the renewal contract by means of educati onal meeti ngs to be hel d over two days in mi d-Aprll. Parti ci pants who may wish to transfer funds to Hartford before the May 1, 1989 impl ementati on date of the renewal contract should be provided the opportunity to do so during the month of April 1989. 8 . V> tlll 'I:~ ....< III.... ~Il.. i~~ ~ ~ Q) V> ~ Il....... ~c .... ~ III >- ~ ~I~ c 8~ ... ~1- Ei 8~ l- t.) < a: I- z C t.) III 01 C CD C r... OI~ CD ~........ ....111111 C ~ CD ~X:>: ~"".... ~ r... ~ III CD CD C~a z a: .... l- V> .... . OIC C r... III~ CD CD........ 01111111 ~~ CD ....X:>: C.... ~ .... > r... ~ " CD CD ..:>r... 00 I- < .... a: o Q .... V> C c.. c a: c.. ! ~ .... :. ~ III o !i ..... t; ..... )( .... .... c :> o o o ..: ~ '; 0" .... .... c :> o ~ ..: ';;; r... CD c c'B .... c :> 8 ~ ~ ~ .... C :> o o ~ ';;; r... CD C CD o CD C o z CD c o z .... c :> o o o ..: III 01 C > ~ V> .... C :> o o o ..: III 01 C > ~ en CD c o z CD c o z SU1 ~ 2l,~ .....$ ra r- "'C ltJ .... CD r... c:: en CD Q) . '" Q)..c ~ E ~ .J ~~~~~L."~ raL.CL.._Q)IfI~ U') raraC-C_C _~..c:::l_CXO O_~OlE:::ICDU III ~ II)CD ....-4Q) :>.... .... OIUQ)"CttJ 8, r... ;i $ r... ~ 01" ra,+- ~e~c::o ~_"'Cc~ _10' c Q)tOeL.~L. ra >. CD L. _ Q) U) +-' >.-urac-c_c "CCX:::J-Cxo <OCDOlE:::ICDU CD " :ti 5$ I ~ ~g~ "'CL.'+-c~ ~$cn~8~i+-' -cQf _CDC::~CD ..cCDI'OIfICD CD_L..>._O~ ~~~L.~~~tL..~t~~~~~~~+-' >.:::Ii-'raL..i-'CDtOCD +-,CDIfI 0 ra _8~~~~"'C~~~~~~~;E$bL. ,;~g(l)(!J>.~'- ..+-'<DQ)+-,:Bf~~U)$. ~~~~U')5E~;g~~~,+-~t+-,~~~ Q)L~'+-$~~i~r-CCD-O~~~~~CD ....CDCDCD~CD....~~~~....CD~r...CDr...O ~ ~~~~~~~~x~P~P~~~2~5: O'l " "CD CD CD ".... C C :> ~ &.:u eg, o ~ ~:;::; . 0"" CD . c.... ~~~ .... c :> 0 ~ 0 " 0 "c ~~~~~~~~~~~~~HH~~ ..: c :> :>Il.. ~ Il.. NU"lOOU"lOU"'tU'lU"'lU'lU'lO\O~N .>t ~cOcO~~cO~cOcOcOcOcO~cOcO~ W ~g 0.... ... I .... Cilen g~~mm~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~;::;~;::;c;~:::';::;c;;::;;:::;;:::;;:::;;:::;m .... .... M:!C'l""lf""lNf'l"'I('t'jfl"'tC'l""lMt"I"'H'f"'lmMt'l"''H't'l Q) c c ;;;~~~:;;:~~~~~~;;;~~~ :> :> 0 0 ~ ...... .-4 ....-4............ 0 0 ~.a.a.s.s.s.s.s.a.a.s.s.s.s.a.s ~ 0 ..: ';;; III ~~~~m~~~~~~~~~~~ 01 r... c f!:'............................................................................................ CD ~ ..........-4..........-1....-4........................................................... 8............................................................................................... c > N~O\C'l""l......Lt"lf".....tCON............<q'C:O~ CD ~ 0 en ..... CD C o z ';;; c o :;:;.... ~ c " CD "EIII ~....c III 0 r...CD~ :>>.... oco. Il..~o III C 0 .... 0. I V> 0 III .... c ~ CD E .... .... III Il.. CD > C H ....; ~ o Il.. CD L.. ~ OJ Q) __ C b ~ tt-ce ~~ - LL.c.::J<- .<'+-- ......:;:J_ I C::::lI ~ 8~O -cIJ...S:::.!g o _"'0 c<DL.I-la..< +' C :::JEQ.. ~ ~~~ u..8Q)~~! :>~ E~ ~ E c~'~::E:~ u..~tri'-ti~.gl-l~~'-! "CilCD~,.0CD.cXCCDr... c._><O_Q)C)Q)Ca.Q.. o c: L. L._.- ::J CO I-l (!$ IJ..::I:I.L. (I) ~ o r... CD ~ .... Vi &. 8 .... o $ ~ o ;;:: :;:; ~ <. '+--< Ll..O QLL. l+-alUrct (!$ 0- U "C_ ....~ C "'C tU c: '- ::I to CUQ)W LL.U .:~.:J~<.cS:: Q)(f) U+,Q) -g~~'O:::~~ ocr... Cil H 0 .... o CD .... ~ o ~.... ....~ ~III ....0 r...o. ~8 I CD.... ....c ~:> III 0::0 U CD 0 .... c..: ~ a: ~~ .... ~ r... III > CD ~ CD CDC~ r... .tc'B~ CD .... c <. ... ... H II) ~~ ....e ~~ i~~ ~t, II) ~ ~~.-< ~I>-I ~ < ... .... 8~ .... ~~ ~i ~~ II -- I III Ole , u '" e ... ,~ .-1..- OI~ '" "....... ~........ e ... ....1Il1ll e..... ~ ~ e~", ~Oa. ..; ~X~ Co) >W ~ CD ~ C "0 .... Q) CD en IG < ~ ... ~ Z't- 0.0. III '" '" a:: i5~5 ~ z Ole 0 e ... Co) 1Il~ '" ~........ III Ul ~ ~ '" '" ....X~ e Z ew 0 ~ .... z a:: > ... ~ "0 '" '" w <~5 ~ II) w . .... e ~ ::l 8 < ~ w a:: ~ CD -; <7 W Q w II) '" , '" 0 >~.o .... ~.... e ';;j ~ ~ "" 0 >t:::J "''''+'....-0 ....... 0 ...a. ... u III '" III .... .... . '" 0 "e~ a:: e ~~;f<r-e~:fi " ~ 8 c: 0..,.... IG ,..... _ II) ..... ~::ItO<+JtO~ 0 .e~ctT:n ;.c.e < <~_"'C C .o..tn ';;j Q)(l)Q).,....,...+'~ ....-'t-+J.foJc::JoO.--ctn ... ~o~gS:;~~~g, '" e cQ)Q.'t:J ,.....L..+JUL.. '" c:ep_Q)'-IGIGU1Uj C!> ca..u"O,+-.oc.Q)Ca. '" e o Z '" e o z "0 , I Q) I .c ~::: 5 ~~ ..c:R'+-~~:I: ... U) C +J It- "0 (I) I'D L. C Q) CD 0,.... ttJ '+-CD+J+JI'G Q) U') C :::J"'C . L..'+-Q)-....c"C cD ~ :::J:;IIC '+-0 UlELL.:::::S en.........L. La.. ;"'~~"'CSlD ... .... III 2l "0 E +JL.(!JC..-CDQ o~>t~bfg ZQ).o+JCLL.H "0 ~~ ~~.g, al..; &t-;~A,"5:;5...t~ :;.[~ ....[ti.s iD'.e<~il L. Q) c.. c: U'I >._ So. .... e C!> '" e il III l!l e .... " ...., '" lJ)1GQ)~'" IG ~!;$g~ .! 8::ir-.;~ ~ !.foJaffL...... g . CL.. "'C -'+-C>. CD......lUG) ~'t-.s:ii~.U)Q)~~:fi.,o~ ..-g..t: ~:!!.;iog .&11) ~t~b~b:X.+J~lGb;'! ~~.i!~~~IG~.Et.s.i!-5~ '" e o Z '" ~ I e~ .... .... III .J: ~~ III " i e e ...."0 a'" .0"0 ~ " .; ~ C"C ,....+J '" ...~ 0 .P c.a IG:-ri~"'" ~t~~."O'+- 0 '" 0 ..... U')IG .tmOIG-g,~~";b .&:fJ < ... ~ ~ '" ~5t;oi:<"05~~~:;t;;r; ..... g~~<Q;~&ti>> ~ Q) o~"fi U1 -; '" III e e % r-L.._L. CD....C+J L. <7 0 ~ ..al~~...~~:::e,.o .~il~ w w z ... . .... ~ :: -; ~ $ w 0 '" ~ ~ S t: -; ....I~ tc 0 OCDtrCDIGCCDCDCDOL.UCTQC z %l+-UJUJ...-IG..o......:aE'+-CUJCl'G 111 .... C!> e ::l i 0 0 g 0 < x ';;j w ... :g '" '" e e '" 0 0 C!> z z o ...... .... e " 0 0 0 ,. < ~ ';;j " -; e e <7 ~ ~ w a .-< ... i .... e " 8 ~ ';;j ... '" :g e '" 0 C!> Z ~ ~:; +i ,... ~ 3~.s ...... 00 :;:: '+- C::IC. t:"s....oea"O 1Il00~t: U)'+-uaZ'L. .<10 .&:g->.18 U !al<........t:';;j.Et:;~$cel< g::~"'5~~~~ti .....O~,.~ 2:Q)....::p co S-\n"C_Q)_ ..':n;.g ~~~~~~~'!&0)5;' LlJCUJ"'~- _ +ttGLIOEL&J t- lIS U ~ CD -0 ::J +II 0 III ~ ~~;$~$~~$g;<~5b; tV '" ..... ... '" ..... III e ~ ... .... o z Vi III I , ..... $~:e 0 8 It- Etn O\DU'I C -o_L.,......C,_ IV L.L...-Q)G ........, __ (1)0 It-~O Cl"""'"IO It- It- It- en Q) +J' C '" 10.0 . cn+lOC:C rao.::J L.. CL. tClCD+l.c;_"'C+J1O ~ ~ ~... <Jl e.... 0 ~ e '" L.~O# ::J _>::J>, ........;OIS8~t:08... ~.Eo-=t~~~~~~ I ~ ... ... 0....'" III '" I II) ,.~ "- o e ~ ~~'" o-5~ 0..<.... ~ N ..... o U1 >. .. > Q) 1....0 >,0 L.Q)Q) OtaZ Q)1J...1t-"O#% It- en CD ClI!J Ul U1 c+lC .. .. c"C '" _ U) . . racL.EU..oCl ~~t:::8af~ ..... . ~# s....... 0; oc ~5~~~ 158 ~8Pe~ L.Uocu--s.. u.."'+J"'tO:>>.-~ .; 0"1 OIl t~ -.:i= ...e ~~ i~ 'CiI<", '" ts CO Vl '" "'l!s..... ... ~ VI>-~ ~I~ c 8~ .... ~i C(I c38 .... CJ e a: .... z o CJ VIOl iB,;: '- "'... ... VI c~ '" X ~UJ '" L. lI\ a> ~ > CO z a: UJ .... OIl UJ . 0> C VI~ iB,t: "'~ "'X CUJ '" > L. "a> a> < > o .... e UJ a: " Q UJ OIl o i:l. o a: i:l. o ...~ C . >> '" a> ~$:p~'!t: c r... ta ..... s... Itf. 1... l- t.. E CD +.>> E ~! ~ ~ ~ ~ c: r- '- C 0_,....0;:,_ ZEIQIO)Ue a> C o z l'! o z a> C o z VI. VI a> VI '" ~C ... ~~~~:ii~ M~:{:....:.s5 ~:efo8J8 N'-U~>U ..... ~ ~ >.~ < . 08a>';t~::l 5c1;;~_-;~ EOL..EL..trCJ) .... _+'L1JL. XQ)+1+lIA 0 tD'CD::Jr-_cc :l[~,Q:::::JC__ $ Q) I "0 L."5, c,~lllc'!' ~_ c~cnO(l) ::1:_ L.._ cp L.~ 5 ..~~ocn>.~ELJ...~ ~i:~-<~~ra$~::Z: CD IJ.. i I ,.... :::::J CD II) "'0. CDLL"'CL.HQ..Cl>>Q)U'IC-o ....._CQ..H c.....3:+'tOc :::J HX< C:::J U1 "0 L&.. CD I'CJ ..... +' CD "'0 LL ~3CD:o~2:~~~.s5Q) tULJ...E--L.- ..r...IJlLa..E lI\ 81il~~~;"~ 8 08c~c::l'->>.c8c Z'l;:JHLL<cnQ..CD.o_1:JH ... C ::l o o o < " a> a> a>'" ...'" cO:: '" :0 !i ::l e " "- c o~ z:;: a> c o z 0; '- a> c a> !: ~t ... ~8~$"":L: :: c ::l . .clO +see 0 NC '-OU)_:::J 0 0.. +1_ 0 0 It- en >" c +' U . ill < O$5'i~,....55~~ ~ ~ E'+-_+'U'ItOE lJ) OIl ] ifl1~~~~t;~! UJ _CD.Q_,-+,Q)_L. . x__+,o > ::l 0 Itf '" L.,.... CD U) C tr C !c :::EUI+,:::::J-olU-UJ- ~ ~ " a> " a> a> L. ... ""'0 !Ii c cc..... ::l ::l '" .... 8 o '- a> .... c.",... OIl 0 e ::l '" .... < o L. X ~~!I~ ... 0; L. .<:.s'" a> a> O+,-CD c . c c ~ c a> oo~ 0 <!l .....EErt") Z .--i .--i 000 ... 000 c !: UlOO ::l Nr-:r,; 0 c 8..... 0 0 ui .....a.n'- 0 0 .........$ < " " ... Q)CDU1,....C ~~~':; ~ ua....CItfl'CJ ItltOO:::Jo. ;;: l'! l'! f .Q,...._"O_ r :::::J +' _ U a> VI &:::::1>- ccc.c a> B~:or 000-4-1 I ... '" U L. C ref !1~!1~ 0:: Cd +1_ Q. a> L. ... $ LOmN..... '" VI '- ] i '" &; < r +' CD I Q) "0 ~o :llg>~~$ ~.." CIJ..c: tn..c: CD CD+,- 0)(1) an+' >.-0> If- VI '- .<:~... ~L. N~~"':ll ~\B a> 0 .<:c ......VI '" ",0 ~O~L. "'I C ~ >. L. ..... .... " ~'" ] 2~f'U~ ~I $~o; 6,! 0..... f:; .._:::::J U e +' C I I . I ~"o~c~ l!! L."'..... Q) () '- IG C ~c:r!.~ ~, ~ii:" ~Q:;:.a:PE 0 z TO; a> " ~ L. ::l L. L. a> c a> IGECL>>. cO u-a>a> :::1_ c....- "'... ,..... ~cQ)c ~'" ...... "_ ,",0 ll.L. ~CVl I OIl t:;: ot: VI 0 a> ~ ,... O'-~ "''' C ...~ c.u- '" '- a> VlI::l c ~_Vl ...a> Q) 0 " ~ c... "'0 VI ~ e ~ 8:; '" 0 "''' ....; 0::< a> ll.< a> cO u- <- H H H lit t~ -;:j:! ...< ~~ i~m ~t) Vl m ~~.... ... ~ ~ i>--;: u ~ ~ '- ... 8~ ... ~i 8~ ~ u < II: ... . o u "' CIlC GI C '- CIl_ GI .= ~ 1;: I "'_ GI .x. {;...... : i Z Q~~ . II: ... ... lit ... . ~ < '" II: CIiI CI ... lit CI IL o II: IL II~ '" I .... cp .." ~ --'" C CD ,".J:: '-... ... 0 . e. LfCI.c4L. . U GI ~lC;.s~ .:5 :d zO~~Q. J J I I ale '" '- .. _ GI ....... CIl",", ._ GI ...x. "'... . ... > '- .. "'GIGI c~~ ! o z I ! :i ! o z I ... e '" 8 ~ I; ;; :! '^ olt N"'C tt4l.fII&.. .. .. ~ en ~ ~+'.c" o ... >'Icno~ Glc-eU ... 1I::lI ... ... "' &.. co. ..O:ll......"CI ~~8"'~l5 ,"_u"'_~ :i..t~t '=:::'0: a:! I IU~~~~ ~~~o:~ x.,(xxx 00000 ... &.. ... &.. .. A.Q.Q.Q.Q. .2"~~~~ ~~~~~ m...."...:c I z ... ~ ~ >.. 0 . I: ....'-" 'O.~",~!s '!sSt!t ._u."'. _ Ill. A.% '-. "' :~'S;~: ut- .....:: c .........,..c: ~~~'"g~ .......a._..,. I I I .. j ... rJ!IrJ!I!! 5 ~~r-: 8 ~ xxx 000 m I; '- '- '- ......... ;; g ~~~ J J cr ~~~ ~ ... z i cg_ell ... '" II '" ~ t; l( - . '" '- ! ! ! I J c! 0 :i z N ..--l ... _S~ '" . C . '" ~ ~... 8 ... 0 ! }i '" "' · is '" .1; - '" I; < -;:~i , I~ ;; GI !lItl I C ..,... ! cr 0 _....::lI . .~ I I ... z ... II,-_e.:: ... :i a~ "':i "'fj ~ 1-.10 :...I....J:: _c . . - a.a..o......ou .... .. _t . . .:tt,,;~ .- ... .- iJiJit.... i~ '" '-- '" .., <..,...}i 8 ~J '-~ .. ! li ..,. }i ~'- . -I .. I.. ell ->.. j'" !.. · ell I '- ~~ ... 1 ! i~ I ll:l... o 8~ I-. 0 "'... GI lIt'-C ~ Z "'...... ......0 I;li; _0... .. III '" !:- '- i!!j . . GI . . ... , ;~~~ . Jll\ ~11 'So ...~ I.J:: I ~ ~ tII ~ ---- ri': ..... ... I. '-.. '- - =... . ';!5g_ ....Nf""l... ~...i;;,- '- _U"t!V="_c~ ;....~ '" .. .~Il!!i~ l; !I ~ ~... 1... ~ Z I lit &...or. .. &-6 .J:::=~~fi! ......15.'.0...>.. I ..... 0.... c:a. '" '- fj tII "'I i- I ...... .0 .a i... .. .a ........ ~.;.!,!,:i.t .; ..; on .,; '" ~~ ...< ~~ i~~ ~~a> '" ~ ....... ~o ... ~ :g!>- 'L: <..> Q. < ~ '- ... 8~ .... ~i ~~ ~ u c a:: ~ . o u ~ c>>c It 8,'; :D ........ ...~~ c-a> i!: .. )(. 0 ~""... z ::: i : Q~~ ... C :0 8 ~ l/ "; ! c:r 0 .... z ... c: J .. '- ! c1 ... c: :0 8 ~ l/ "; c:r .... ... ~ J .. .. ! c1 ... c: :0 J l/ "; c:r .... ... ~ J - . J i ! o z ! o z . J .. > . ... ~5 .& ..~ . III f~ ~ .. e U . J .. > 1..: fg . J .. > . ...~ .0 .& ..~ 15 . 1 :i 1~ f~ ! o z ... ~la>. +'- 'V- a .... II:: ~ _ . o:t:5.f~~ z.... ~ ..... -~=!!= ~i:::~it:J i.;..'l:;cl:i_ g -'-fD · i!~~~'l:; =>- ..-i'..'L:ISc:-I.. . C>>\O.. 1_ 0 ~ _ .I:. C c..., . -.:I ;i ~ I .. t, g';:.; ~._;:Ic:c>>'Ee~ ....-..>..c___ "'-1'" -1-- ~ _""'V>.." :!'O~~.;!.l.g-= i I o .. ';-.:1 18,~ .. .. .. .....- ~~u ..u- - ... -. I i...ll ~ ';... 18,t' .. .. .. -.:Ie_ ~'5~ ."l i!! o ... ';-.:1 I&t' .... .. -.:1.- ~~u ..u- .. ... - .. I i!ll M .--t . a:: .... ~ III .... . c>>c c: .. lIl_ a> a>..... C>>~lIl .- a> ..x:a ;YJ., ~i: <~~ I -.:I . :. ~ ... .. . j.....tg ..Ig._ vi' b~ I. C c: c lc:i8,! Ii i- ... . ....~.o..., o ... ';-.:1 I&t' .. .. .. -.:1,,- ~'5~ .. ... -il i...! :l ';... I&t' .... .. -.:1.- ~1i~ .. ... -il i...! ~ .. . u . J .. > :l - .... . I&~ .. .. .. ....... ~'5~ .. ... - .. I ~!! ~ c .... a:: CD Cl .... III o A. o a:: A. I ~ ~ II 5 ;z .... I I I . j ! i -.:I . ~ &....... . j.....tg ..Ige_ v i b~ ~ C' c: c lc:i8,! Ii i- ... . ..~.o.... 1 . fa ~ ~ !'~i 8~.s.. fllsa'" ...t:!.. i .; I i I" !iI$= -.:I_ . .... c: _ . olt:~...~~ z....... M -~=!!= ~i:::~it:J i.;..'Oatl_ . 1 '; > . ~i .& ..~ ... f~ 1 c: ... .I: .. 0 ",...JIlt III.: ~.;::! Z 8, '- ~ .. a> '- >- IS ,f.,;~!.",!s_ ~ - "gISt ~__e 8...... :!c~ a.- !. 8 ii! ! .. z::.:.... ~+'-o ..; ....: en ~~ ...c ~~ i~~ ~~Q) V) ~ ~l!5"'" ... ~ ..>-~ ~I~ 8~ 11 .. 0> ~ ... 8,~'" - OIl ........ l! i ~ ....... ~ - CD Q ~ ..X. 0 0 ~... .... z z z z ~ .... .. c .. CD CD II: Ci~~ ~ . Ole: 0 e: ... ~ .._ CD 8,'" ... .. .. ! I ! .._ CD CD ...x. e: ..... 0 :i :i . .. ... Z II: ~t:g .., <~~ ~ .., .., ~ z;. -CD A. . .~ +'lItfa :;.!;;~~; 8... iSI~ '0 ... .... ~~;!:~;o. 0 ~ .. e... :; .. .. ~ Q.'1:J &.:= '5 -; ';; ! ! c S - .. ~Eaf.c:g,...:n~ . X i .... .... .., ~ . . ..... -8"'~CD51 ... .. . . .; . .; II: CDI~ i.......g' 0.0...... li' g 01 ~5 .... Ul .s..._li....li..~ ~..:... . .. 'S en. L. L. L. ~ f8 fS 0+'''''...''''11- f"l_4C>o!. = rr ~L.O:::ll.A:CD;:,L._ ....!t;;i! l~ l~ ... ....Q.+'Ift...>..Ift.'" .., en = ~ ~o~>. 0 .... 8 ~ .. "'..I.... II: .. ~~ "; .. ~ . . ~ - .. .... . · X i . CD CD .. 'b.g.....: .. .. U oi c: c: ... ~i:... .. .. l! l! "'--i>- J J . 0 ....!t;; ! Ul z .... .... Ii$ '0 .. e~~'O .. ! ! . J . X ... .... ...... ~ . .c: '0 8 g i ~i . . ... .. ~J li' .... . .. - l! ~li!u:;1 ,MoO W; .. C"I"\_ClCC>t, ... U f rr 0 N~~I;:' I~ 1'0 ~ ... z . .. .; Ii .. c: 0 ~ 8 .. "'... i .. D~~'O>. c: .... ~ . . t; .. .. .. . . .... ~ ..~ CD CD M ... C:i .., .. 0.0 li' .. .. ... ~ g. - !i !i ! l! .....U:::lI 8 J ...._.c:c ~ 0 ....!t;;li ~ z <::t ....... I .... Ii 8 ~ e .. {5 "0 .VI .. Ii.... ~~ - i R...~...I'i!'~ lS-eo>t.L.....CID .... = X .. X~ i...:. i 08glili'au~!u ......-...-...- 1lI......u.......R....... . ""-:lic:....u....! ....! en Ii! X.:P Xli! A.... . i $ ui li'! ~ .... ~ 5- ~ -....- c....,Q. " :=I L. .... ::t . - ..!...S....... .X i Xu':; '08g'O.;,::~ fAli.8..i~..~;;.. "".....1>....11>...0 ...... .L.. .."" N .a CI) Q. U Q.~ a. . .... . CD J '0 ~ . 0" 11'-5'= .ts;;... >...&i.: ~!i~.c:$ 'fS~~1 1~8~ l;. '5 ! .. > . .. ~Ii ~J l! :i .. c: '" 8 ~ ~ . . CD .. Ii J i . J ~ z I ~!5 .. Ii 8.~~ L. L. =' 0 "" IV C U .;:o~~ I a~~ ... ~- i'O:! ..$;;! 1:115- ~V)_. ai ! ~ .. :P 0 1"'- !.... -~ 45... ... o .... ~ I ~ li'~ U . Q.- - - =..., +' ............ __c IV z~. Q. ai &II lD 8. . ... -3 3 &II lD 8. . ~ a ! ~ 0. < ;!; OIl ~~ ...< ~~ ii " '" .. <Xl V) '" ...... ..0 ... ~ ..>-~ ~I~ 8~ .... ~i B~ ... e,) e II: ... . o e,) .. "''' CD " ~ CIl~ CD ...... ....... ,,- CD ..X. ~....... .. ~ .. .. .. .. Q~ci . II: .... ... OIl .... . "''' c ~ ..-.. ....... "'.... ..-.. "'x. c.... .. ... > ~ .. ....... c~ci ... e .... II: III Q .... OIl Q II. o II: II. m ~ lC ~ i ... t; ~ .... I I i ~ ... C '" 8 Ji! ~ - '" cr .... ... g 8 Ji! .. J ... C ! ~ - '" ~ ... i ~ .- . J ... i ~ - '" ~ ... C ! .- . j ~!:i ~...- ... l!! · ..-... ~ ! i 'O:$~ g Is 'g. . ~...I~ ~i'!;~ ,; ~ i ! o z: " .;. o g ...- ~:: .... D" a8 c'" - .. c.. ~ ~ ~; ... . "'i I. ~ ~ . -'" C ...- ~:;: ~ .. ~~ .... Q, ... lK . . D .. II ~ g "'.. - c~.. -.- EE~ . C 0 ....ou ... ~g> I:: ...'Oi I: ~ .... . - Q," ... ... c... .. ....... ... I J .;. .~ 5 Cll" _ c~... 'Eli . C 0 ....ou ." ~g> I:: 'Ii .. ~ . . Q,CD ~...'O: ...... ~f 8, g~2: 8... .. :..~:iN N_ ........ 1:;:;$'''- I.C..O ~:t'V_,.... C. ! i ! i .. :;:; ~ .. Q, Is..: .. ! ~ .. ~ ... Q,:i 1- ..... .- .. t .. Q, ls..: . 1 ~ .. .. ... Q.:i 1- ..... I ls~ . 1- ....~ -.. 0.... . I" .. .... !i; I ls~ . 1- ...- -.. Q.t · ! . ~ .... 0.... ..~l~ 0-_< . . 1- .= ...-.... -.. 0.... I .. 1 :0 .. . ~ Go" 1,1,. .. tl .-- ... . '" Is":c! .. . I.... .... ........ ." Q.~ .. 1- . ........ .. . 1 .. ." ~ . ~ .. ~ cD ! i ! o z: .. ~ .. - ~ C . 0"; ... . .::: ... ... ~: ':i~ c . .. . ..... 3 ~i .. ~ .. ~ .. ~ .. ~ 1-: ~'" ..c! . . I::: .t;... !l . ->> t!!'g. i~ ! e...=.ii =-..._-~ 8 t~;-~.l:;:; .. '" "'1 c 1;.. = :.~u~-::~c !..t-f"il.: ~~.Q..!>- !~ l-o...I.D.u'" c5 I 8 _>->-0$ i iai!~:ig ~ _c!LAJ~L.- Q. ~~ . Is !i ~ ~ Is ... __e -....0..... i!.!s......~~3.::! 1~..;5~__~ o i08...~~~ ~1~~Ji!.!;~; .... .. ~ ~ ~ .... .. "" " ~8'~ ~'": C~ _ 1i"~.1 g ..._.....Ift. -.""'cic,,!: ... ~- ~ C; u., _ . r.c ~.+'; &,.... _:II"'.... II i~.!f.!::: > .... _...c: l:i03f i"'I5!=~ ...... _ II .~..._::. L.Oi~:t" r:;:;o"'~: L Q.'- +tc .. A..O..-c::J ! .. " ! ! B >> l. ~.. -5 "'- c... i8" I: '; c i . ::: .... I:~ ';1 c>> I !.; :.~t :..8 N ..: ci .. ~ .. " L.{') ..--t ! ! ! . " .,,1: i'; ~c ,~ .... !~ !~ l"ti .. '" c OIIC ~..... -..... 0.- ........... ..; .; CI) ~~ ....< ~~ i~~ ~~a> VI ~ ~~..... .... ~ "'>-~ ~I~ 8~ ... ~i ~~ ~ u C Ill: ~ . c u ",,,,..11-- I) r: .. 01_ II> .......... ........ C:~II> ..X. ~"'.... ",.. .. "'.. I) Q~a ! :i ~ z "'c: c .. "'~ II> 11>........ 01"'", ",-I) ....x. c... ~ .... > .. ~ .".... <~t; ! o z ! i Z II: '" ~ '" '" . g 1:: I) '" Cl> . r: .. -I) ..t Ii ;! 8... Ji!~ 0'" .. t'E I~ .. '" :00,= _r: ...- ~g; !~ .. .. c . J [ '" .. I 1atl .,,!i.. c u ",..c r: '" :J ~; ...- '" &.~ .: f! & :00,..... - ... ... 0 ..... t....~ II r: l:l ...31 . li'J<O: i:: I i.a .... c '" o u u < o .. .. ... &. . II: ~ c '" Ill: ~ c '" CI) C A. C Ill: A. .. r: j .; c .. ... u f :. o &. .. _r: "0 .. .- ... ! t: &. ;;~ ~ 8 g> "i: ~; i jJ Ii' :; ... ... .. ~ - . J J '" II> >- ..: N . .... . . .. .; 0 Cl> r: c ':6 '" . .. 8 ... ..... u .. r: I Ji! ... "'Ii' f &. 8~ ~ Ii' . Ji!~ '" a: :; A. ot: ~ ... 0 g ..'" '" .. _c lC ..0 t'g> .. "'- ~ ... !~ Ii &. i .. I. ...'" c !g> ..~ '" ... 8 ~ >.L. Ii; Ji! L. >.+; ig~ ... t _c K fi'" t-t '" - I~ !~~ . ! ... ! ! c:!VI... & 0 ..: ... ..; z ~ ..--i .. c .; '" !~ 8 c 0 !. .. Ji! ..... U t !ili' Ii' f &. i: - : '" '" :. :E ~ 01:: I 0 g . ..'" .. ~g .. l+; t'g> L. I~ .. J ;;~ c 8g> ..~ '" 8 >. >.L. 'i: >.+; - . Ji! L. C L. ~ _r: .0.. .. L. fi'" t-.. ... II I~ !~~ 1 .. J c:! "'... ~ ..: N ..; 6~ '" .. .. ....... C L. '" +; &. ~5,. '" I) I '" c-'8 II: II: I t:!1: I) Cl> U C . .. :Ii +; ~..~ ~ .,; I: Ii I ~ ... ...: .... .... > > . Central vontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF April 6, 1989 NO. VII 1. Et-lGINEERING 1 SUBJECT CONQJR WITH ll-IE CONCEPT OF ll-IE FORMATION OF LOCAL It-PROVEtJfNT DISTRICT 57 DATE March 31, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION FORMATION OF LID SUBMITTED BY Jay S McCoy Construction Division Manager INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: A request has been received for the formation of a Local Improvement District (LID) in Lafayette. BACKGROUND: A group of seven property owners in the Brown Avenue area of Lafayette (see Exhibit A) have requested that a LID be formed by Central Contra Costa Sanitary District for the purpose of financing the installation of sanitary sewer facilities to serve their properties. Staff communicated early on to the owners that certai n potenti al probl ems exi sted with respect to the formation of this 'type of LID: o Simil ar di stricts in the past appeared to have had support but, when owners were. required to commit to participating in a LID by signing a petition, the support was lacking. o The formation of an assessment district for an area as small as proposed is generally economically inefficient. Nevertheless, the owners have circulated petitions for the formation of a LID and all of the owners have signed. The problem with support mentioned above will not occur for the proposed LID because 100 percent of the owners are in favor of the LID. Three properties which are adjacent to the proposed LID will be provided sewer service by the sewers which the LID will install. The owners of these properties are opposed to being included in the LID. Hence, their properties have been excl uded from the proposed boundary resulting in 100 per cent support. The LID will consist of two non-contiguous areas as shown on Exhibit A. Having two separate areas is acceptable because there is no legal requirement that parcels within the LID be contiguous. The second potential problem with this LID is the high costs. The owners with property within the proposed LID have been advised of the high costs estimated to be in excess of $20,000 per property and are willing to bear these high costs of a small LID. The owners are prepared to make a presentation to the Board of Directors to provide the Board with more details relative to the formation of the LID. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 JSM RAB SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONCUR WITH THE CONCEPT OF THE FORMATION OF LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 57 PAGE 2 DATE March 31, 1989 OF 4 Staff concurs that it is appropriate to take the initial steps to form the LID. The final decision by the Board to form the LID will be made after bids are received for the sewer work and after a public hearing is held to consider protests. Since there is 100 percent participation in the LID, no protests are anticipated; but if protests are made, staff may recommend to the Board that the LID not be formed. A list of future actions by the Board is attached for i nf ormati on. RECOMMENDATION: Concur with the concept of the formation of LID 57. --------- 13028-9/85 / 1 MACIAS 2 SULLIVAN 3 GROSSGART 4 CHAPMAN 5 SWANSON 6 SPONZILLI 7 LENCI/DOLL UNIMPROVED IMPROVED ?( ~ ~ l!2 > c( .0:. 0: ~ -I/) Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ~ MID-HILL SEWER PROJECT Exhibit PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT A 2523.9/88 FUTURE BOARD ACTIONS I. Adopt a Resolution accepting petitions. 2. Adopt a Resolution approving a proposed boundary map. 3. Adopt a Resolution requesting jurisdiction from the city of Lafayette. 4. Adopt a Resolution approving a "Negative Declaration." 5. Adopt a Resolution directing filing of the boundary map with County Recorder. 6. Adopt a Resol ution approving agreement for legal services with the Bond Counsel. 7. Adopt a Resolution approving agreement for engineering services with the LID engineer. 8. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to order improvements. 9. Adopt a Resolution accepting the engineer's report for the LID and setting the hearing date for receiving public testimony of the LID. 10. Adopt a Resolution calling for construction bids. 11. Direct staff to give Notice of Improvements for bidding purposes. 12. Hold a Public Hearing, approve the engineer's report, assessment spreads, and assessment district. 13. Adopt a Resolution awarding the construction contract. 14. Adopt a Resolution authorizing approval of change orders. 15. Authorize funds for the project. 16. Adopt a Resolution to claim exemption from audit by the State Treasurer's Office. 17. Adopt a Resolution determining assessments remaining unpaid. 18. Adopt a Resolution ordering the sale of bonds. 19. Adopt a Resolution ordering the issuance of bonds. 20. Accept the construction contract. . Centra :ontra Costa Sanitarl )istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF A ril 6, 1989 NO. IX. PERSONNEL 1 SUBJECT DATE IN .AaXHlANCE WITH ARBITRATCR'S ~m, nmY 'JlIE APPFAL (F' '.rE8MINATIaI BY MARK IaiERY, ASSISrANT IiRiINEER March 28, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION PER9IiINEL SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT/DIV Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager 1\dnini..strativejPersonnel ISSUE: In accordance with the Grievance Procedure in the current Memorandum of Understanding between the District and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Employees I Association, Public Employees I Local No.1, the Board of Directors may adopt, reject, or modify the recamendation of an appointed neutral third party (arbitrator) in appealed disciplinary matters. Bl\Q{<axH>: Following progressive discipline, Mr. Mark I..c::Mery, Assistant Engineer, Engineering Depart:Irent, Construction Division, was terminated fran his position for refusing to shave and be fit tested for respirator use as required by the District I s Safety Policy (District Safety Directive 7.1, Respiratory Protection Policy/Program.) On Septanber 15, 1988, Mr. Lowery appealed his termination to the Board in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the parties. The Board authorized the selection process for securing the services of an arbitrator to hear the appeal and make a recamendation to the Board for their consideration. The District and Union agreed on Mr. Francis Walsh, Esq., as the arbitrator fran a list sul:mi tted by the State of California Mediation and Conciliation Service. The arbi trator I s decision has been distributed to the Board under separate cover. He ruled on the issue of whether the District had just cause for discharging Mr. I..c::Mery, and if not, what the remedy should be. On page 15 of his Opinion, Mr. Walsh states his award as: 1.) deny the grievance; and 2.) the District had just cause for termination. ~m: Deny and dismiss the appeal of Mr. Mark I..c::Mery, Assistant Engineer, as the final action of the District. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 PM <8 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 17 POSITION PAPER 80ARDMEE~~<t-~, 6, 1989 s'RiffibRIZATION TO HIRE SEASONAL EMPLOYEES NO. IX. PERSONNEL 2 DATE March 10, 1989 TYPE 'MStlttNEL SlJ6MJTTED BY \Amryn Radin Freitas" Personnel Officer INITIA TING DEPT A~i n 1 strati velPersonne 1 ISSUE: District staff has assessed its needs for seasonal help in 1989. BACKGROUND: Each year the District hires students during the summer months for vacation relief, cleanup, and special projects; and during the school year or semester breaks for additional assistance. Authorization was given for thirty-eight student positions last year. Approval is requested for forty seasonal positions in Fiscal Year 1989-90. A summary of the requests for seasonal employees is attached. Although the hourly wages for seasonal employees were established in 1987, staff recommended a continuation of the hourly rate schedule as follows: Student Positions Proposed Salary No experience necessary, i.e., clerical, laborers, grounds $ 6.50 Professional, i.e., chemist, engineer $ 8.00 $10.00 Technical, i.e., drafting, survey For every year a student returns, add $1.00 per hour to a maximum of th ree additional summers. For example, a student laborer who has worked here for the past two summers woul d receive $8.50 per hour this summer. The extra doll ar woul d E recognize experience and serve as an incentive for returning students. The approximate cost of this action will be $240,000 from departmental 0 & M bu dgets. The Board Personnel Committee has reviewed this request. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the hiring of 40 persons for seasonal employment. INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 CRF PM -a - ~ L. .c.1I) <tI ~<tI Q) 10 (Y"I (Y"I 111 M CX) :::J .... M M (Y"I < .... O\<tI 0 CX)~ r- 111 N 111 M q- 0\0 M M M~ H ~ C Q) CII) E OJ:: (Y"I q- 0\ 0 (Y"I r- J:: II)~ (Y"I 111 111 N 111 0 L.C M <tI Q)O ~ c..E ;: 0 0 . 0 (Y"I M 0 0 . M M N M M 0 t 0 * . M N M q- 0 i M ~ t; 0 C. 111 . M N (Y"I 0 0\ .... 0\ CX)II) I~ 0 CD 0 0 i~ . ~l 0\ ~ . 0 0\ f 111 CX) . 10 q- 0 0\ CX) M M lG .. c.. >0 c! L. 0 <tI 0 :::J L . M N N 111 C CX) <tI ..., C .... 0 111 -a . N (Y"I 111 Q) r- N .... L. 0 .c. 0 ~ 111 :::J . (Y"I 111 M M M M <tI 10 M C 0 .... ~ II) .... C II) C Q) 0 ~ .... 0 0 > .... 0 <tI c.. .... .... ~ '+- .... ~ II) ~ <tI 0) o L. t=- O) .... <tI L. C ~ C > L. CD .... >oil) .... .... ~ c.. L. L..... ~ .... C II) 0 Q) <tiC 0 ...... .... Q) ~ .... ~ . C ~ C Q) Q) L. ~ .... C .... L..c. ~ Q) -8 0 <tI 0) O~ II) a::: ~ (/) .... C Q) .... < 0 a.. UJ (/) C * Central Contra Costa sanitary District March 9, 1989 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CATHRYN FREITAS, PERSONNEL OFFICER PAUL MORSEN, DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER SEASONAL HELP REQUEST FOR 1989-90 I have reviewed the department's requirements for seasonal help and have identified the need for seven students as follows: o The Secretarial Support Section will require one temporary help position to cover vacations, fill in for the receptionist, and assist with updating files and heavy workloads. o Personnel/Public Informati on pl ans to use one temporary employee in the pri nt shop. When not assi sti ng the Pri nter, this individual will work on Personnel duties and clerical activities for Purchasing and Secretarial Support. In January, 1989, the Board authorized a student to assist with the recycling program. This position is requested for the coming year to continue with recycl ing and assist with other public information activities such as the employee newsletter, speakers bureau and grraphics projects. o The Senior Building Maintenance Technician has requested two temporaries for the summer. Their activities will include building maintenance, minor repair tasks, and extensive pa inti ng. c o Purchasing/Materi al s Control woul d like a summer temporary to assist with the annual physical inventory, act as vacation relief, and do miscellaneous jobs in and around the warehouse. o Risk Management/Safety is in need of a summer student to research safety/health issues; investigate employee suggestions; schedule safety/health training programs; and do filing and statistical analysis. The number of positions requested is the same as last year, including the recycling position authorized in mid-year. CRF:j f --- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- +a c: c i~ 0 en L. "'~I L. a> O+' IU ~ ~(I)Z ...J :::J IU en CI) CD a> (I) ~c:'O c .... .... .... a> a> c: ~ ~ > ~ '" en a> i"~'" .... ~ a:+'~ L. (I) CD..... .c a: u --- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ll'l Ll'l 0 Ll'l Ll'l Ll'l 0 . . . . . . . ,.... \0 0 \0 ,.... \0 CO .... .... ...... .... .... .... .... liE ~ .... ~ f3 i~~ ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ~~~~ ~ ~~~.-4 ~i .::I:. ~ ~ .::I:. ~ .::I:. ~ a> a> a> a> a> a> a> ~~~~ o. Q) a> a> a> a> a> a> .~ :. :. :. :. :. :. :. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... 0'" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L&.IL&.I zi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (l)Z Z ~ .... ~ (I) c::: --- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ~ ",8 I~ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... (1)0 ~ --- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- 8 .... en - > .... Q ~ o i .... IG - '" i ~ c o - ~ ! o .....~ ....c: CD.... c: !; "'J:l a?~ 8 c: Cl)1G c:c: :;.a ....c: -- ~:I ,.. o '" ~ ~B c:en - ,.. enlG IG_ ~'" ~.a ~:I ~ I IG c: :I~ i: a:~ '. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District March 6, 1989 TO: C'tTHRYN RADIN FREITAS FROM: JOiN LARS().J ~ SUBJECT: 1989-90 CSOD REQUEST FOR SUMtoER STUDENTS I request 15 summer students for summer 1989. For comparison, the number of summer students employed during the past five years is: Calendar Year Number 1984 8 1985 8 1986 10 1987 13 1988 13 I estimate the cost to be approximately $69,926 or 3.8 percent of the current CSOD 1 abor cost. Each year, in addition to providing vacation relief, the summer students have added to CSOD's capabil iti es by compl eti ng si gnificant proj ects. During summer 1988 the area of the pipe storage yard was expanded by SO percent and the spare/repair parts storage was expanded into unused shop space. Also, during 1988, many small crews were deployed to complete time consuming easement projects consi sti ng mostly of hand excavation. All of the day-to-day activities of the previous year are planned to continue at the previous levels except that the easement crew program will be expanded by one laborer and an additional clerical position will be used to organize the construction project backlog files. JLldah Attachment cc: R. Dolan (with attachment) U) t- U) LU 8 o..a:!j2 mt-C; :Z:LU.-4 ~~I ~co~ LLI-JO'I U)LU.-4 Z ~ U) a::: ~ '. ~ \/) I+- Z co I+- LLI ,.. !... 0 a:c~ (J) .r: ~i2 \/) !... ~ ..:.:; !... -+-> (J) U)z - (J) c:: c:: ..:.:; c:: \/) U) ro ..:.:; !... 0 0 c:: 0 O'l (J) ~iLLl ...... ~ CJ U VI >, ..... \/) c:: !... U) C V') co ~ "'0 !... !... ~ 0 0 LLlI-4..... :3 ~ 0 0 ro co (J) -I ~ a!> -+-> c:: 0 (J) Z I.J.... !... c:: :E ..... -I -+-> \/) wi2~ CJ 0 !... c:: c:: (J) ..... (J) a: Q. ..0 VI - :::l .r: E (J) ..:.:; !... ..lJi:. LU ..... 0 co co 0 ..... !... ..... .r: ..... a: c:: "":) l- I- "":) ~ a:l ::E: u :E >- Qi ~c! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q..U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-4 Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l Ll"l 0>- . . . . . . . . . . ~~ O'l co co co co co co r--. r--. r--. U) U) U) U) U) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ is :z: ~ I.&.LLI OLLl ::a ffi~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 iO:: o::t o::t <:::t <:::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t o::t ~~ ~ (J) (J) M U u l- ..... ..... M "'C c.. I+- lO- U) c:: e::: c:: c:: c:: c:: V') V') I.J.... L. 0 l+- I+- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :E :E ........ co .r: 0 0 c:: e::: c:: c:: c:: c:: ...... ...... 0.. 0.. 0 >- V') I , a: , , I I I , , I I , I I , ~ ~ ~ !... !... !... !... !... L. !... !... L. L. L. L. !... co co (J) (J) C!.J (J) (J) (J) Q) (J) Q) (J) (J) Q) Q) u u ::l !... !... !... !... L. !... L. !... L. L. L. !... L. ..... ..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L. !... U) ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 (J) (J) co co co co co co co co co co co co co ~ ..... -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I U u t- Z ~ ~ LLI Cl 0 Cl Cl 0 Cl Cl 0 Cl 0 Cl 0 Cl Cl Cl C 0 ::::> 0 ::::> ::::> ::::> 0 0 ::::> 0 0 0 0 0 .-- V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') u u u u u u u u u u u u u U L) ~ N ("") o::t Ll"l U) r--. co O'l o N ("") ~ ~ o::t Ll"l Central Contra Costa sanitary District March 6, 1989 FROM: :::: :~E::~ SEASONAL EMPL ~~~QUEST - 1989 - 1990 TO: SUBJECT: Number of Persons Needed S6 .50 S8 S8.50 S9.50 S10 S11 Person Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Months 1 2 4 2 2 1 59 Authorized in 1983 - 15 Authorized in 1984 - 15 Authorized in 1985 - 15 Authorized in 1986 - 14 Authorized in 1987 - 15 Authorized in 1988 - 13 1988 Total 12 The Plant Operations Department's request for seasonal employees is for a total of 12 positions. Several of the S6.50/hour - S9.50/hour returning students' positions are to serve as aides for the Buildings and Grounds crew, and two are for the Pumping Stations. These positions will be used for slJllmer-related activities such as weed control, landscape work, and outside painting. The laboratory position will be an undergraduate chemist used for vacation relief and special project work. The two positions listed for $8 - S8.50/hour will do shop drawings and training graphics. The positi ons listed at $10-$11/hour are to hi re graduate students or last-year engineering students to act as aides to ~ant engineering staff on various ongoing projects such as energy conservation, process modification, commodity reduction, and reel amation. The position of computer programmer will be a graduate student who will aid in the upgrading and conversion of the Plant's process control computer system. OrIB: pk cc: R. Dol an Att...chments ~ en LIJ ffi a. a:: 2 ....Jcrlt-~ c::( 1% LIJ ..... ( ~~I ~mm L1J....0\ en I"'" en a:: ~ ~ -. ~ t- QJ ..0 Z C C Vl C C C I.LI - 0 0 ,...... 0 0 0 ~~~ Vl Vl It! Vl Vl C Vl ~ S- (/) S- S- O C ~ QJ QJ QJ QJ +J COQJ Vl~ enz 0- 0- C 0- 0- ,......QJO+JO- Q)Q) en It! ..... -"'t!. +J ~ ~+J t-il.Ll ~ ~ ..... ~ ~ EO+JIt!~ ,...... C en Q QJ QJ ~ QJ QJ 1t!01t!..c:QJ 0..... I.LI 1-1 1-1 z: z: ~ z: z: :C:C0-3z: <.!)3 Si~ a::~g >- ell . . . . . .. . ~~ ~~~~~ ~~ . . . . . ..c:..c:..c:..c:..c: ..c: ..c: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ................................... .............. Q.;cn ..c: ..c: ..c: ..c: ..c: 00000 00 1-1 0>- ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... Lt)Lt)Lt)Lt)Lt) Lt) Lt) 0 00 ,...... 0 00 . . . . . . . ~z2 ,...... ,...... ,...... 000'10'100\0 00 00 I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ I&.m OLLl :. f5~ 0 0 0 0 0 00000 00 ia:: V V V V V vvvvv vv i~ +J +J C C ~ QJ QJ "'0 "'0 C ::3 ::3 1-1 0 +J +J t- ..... (/) (/) 1-1 +J cn ..... en en ~ Vl C C 0 ..... ..... a:: 0- Vl ~ ~ en u QJ QJ C ~~~~~ ~~ I ~ ..... QJ QJ ..... Q)QJQJQJQJ QJQJ QJ ..c: C c +J ~~~~~ ~~ ..... e.. ..... ..... ~ 00000 00 ~ ,...... It! en en It! ..0..0..0..0..0 ..0 ..0 QJ ~ C C ~ It! It! It! It! It! It! It! c::: <.!) I.LI I.LI Cl ....J....J _J....J....J ....J ....J z: ~ (/) 0 I ~ (/) z: - ,...... en It! z: 8t-t 0 c +J 0 ~ I.LI (/) "'0 - j~ +J ....... C ~ ....... C I.LI QJ QJ It! c::( (/) ~ Vl 0 U u en u ~ z: C u z: cc c VlVl (/) 0 0 0 c::( It!..... It! en "'0 o!=L:V) - +J ..... Vl z: C~ C cc <.!) t- It! +J Vl I.LI QJQJ QJ ..... ::3 . . . . . z: . . 'z~ c::( S- It! QJ ~ +JQJ +J "'OO,......NM~Lt) -,......N c::: 0 S- U z: cc C r-S- 0- c::( - I.LI ..0 QJ 0 - -r- ...... ..... ..... <.!) :E ....J C 0- It! e.. ~ ~ It! It! ::3 =:) 0- 0 ....J 0 0- :E :E ~ 0- stMER Hap 1989 - 1990 PlANT OPERATIONS DEPMllENT -c Persons/Months Division/ Number Bal ance Against Section Authorized 1988 - 1989 Budoet Operations/Laboratory 1/6 -2 Operations/Process Control 1/5 -3 Operations/Process Control 1/4 0 I I Maintenance/Staff I 1/5 +1 I Maintenance/Engineering 1/5 0 I Maintenance/Buildings & I 5/25 +5 Grounds Pumping Stations West I 1/4 0 North 1/5 0 - - T ota 1 12/59 -1/+1 BATTS:*M-SEAS EMP '. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District March 2, 1989 FROM: CATHRYN FREITAS '? ROBERT A. BAKER ~~~~S DAVID R. WILLIAMS " TO: VIA: SUBJECT: 1989-90 SEASONAL HELP ~ Transmitted herewith is my request for seasonal help for the coming fiscal year. The two drafting positions are needed to assist in our map updating workload. It is essential to keep the collection system maps current and, with the recent increase in capital project output and anticipated initial training on the automated mapping equipment, we anticipate that temporary help will be needed to prevent an increase in the mapping backlog. DRW/Is Attachment c c : J. Ke 11 y J. McCoy B. Michalczyk C. Swanson ~ REQUEST FOR SEAS~Al. EJft.OYEES 1989 - 1990 DEPARllENT SUMER POSITI~ NUM3ER OF HWRS/WEEK ANTICIPATED HWRL Y SAlAAY Engineering Dept. Drafting 40 hours per week $8.00 Engineering Div. 7/1/89 - 9/30/89 and 6/1/90 - 6/30/90 Engi neeri ng/ Drafting 40 hours per week $10.00 Engineering Div. 7/1/89 - 9/30/89 and 6/1/90 - 6/30/90 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District March 13, 1989 TO: CATHRYN FREITAS VIA: ROBERT A. BAKER (~ FROM: JAY S. MCCOY fl'1. SUBJECT: 1989-90 PERSONNEL BUDGET REQUEST --e Transmitted herewith is my request for personnel for the corning fiscal year. The seasonal position in Survey is justified to provide timely responses to survey requests for capital projects and to provide vacation rel ief. The seasonal position in Permit/Right-of-Way is justified to reduce the backlog of documents which must be microfilmed and to provide clerical assistance to the permit counter. I am not requesting aRY co-op students for the corning year. JSM:gv Attachment cc: R. Baker w/attach J. Ke 11 y " D. Will iams n -. ., ..... z UJ ..... ~~~ (l)Z (I) .....iUJ (I) C UJl-Cl-C a~~ wF:f e::UJ__ ,. e:: >- ci ~~ a.: (I) .... u>- 0 0 ii Ln 0 . . \D <Xl -bIT -bIT ~ (I) L&.I a.ml ~~ .--.. .--.. rrl... Vl Vl :. ~ ~ %LU...c f5~ Cl) Cl) !~I OCl) OCl) ilX o::T~ o::T~ ~U)~ i~ \D \D ...... ...... L&.IcdO\ - - (I) ...c ~ (I) e:: ~ J ~ X Vl Cl)Cl) .... C...... ... Co,... .... c:( I.L. en S- ~ C'l .., Cl) Co,... 0.. e:: oE ~ ...... Cl) W ......Cl) ::I: .,... C. If- '" ~ ~ oc Cl) s-o > Uo,... S- o,... +" :::I ::E:1t! (/) I If- .--.. 0 C I 0 ... .., -- .,... oC Vl .., I C'lC'lC C'lU Co,... 0 E:;Cl) .~ c:a::::-,.. 0,... (/) S-"'.., S- ~ Cl) .., U Cl)~ Cl).,... Cl) Cl)Cl) CE(/) C > ~ .,... S- .,... S- C'lCl)~ C'l:::l C C. It! C(/) LL1-3 LL1_ . ". Central Contra Costa Sanitary District March 14. 1989 TO: CATHRYN R. FREITAS VIA: ROBERT A. BAKER J AtES M. KELL Y ~l, ~ ~~ FROM: SUBJECT: PLANNING DIVISION SEASONAL HELP REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989-90 Attached is the Planning Division's personnel budget request for seasonal help for the coming fiscal year. Seasonal Help C1 position): Will work on Water Reclamation. Sludge/Ash Handling. possibly Ash Recycling. Collection System Studies. and Pretreatment. RL : bc Attachment -! ~ '" &LI S 11. a:: 2 mt-5\ :E:&LI.... !~I ~CX1~ &LI...IO\ "'&LI.... ! '" a:: ~ -- t- z ~~i O'l "'z 0 '" N t-iLLJ ~ '" Q QJ LLJ ...... ...... :I: ai!) It! ~;:e: III QJ &LI- ~ a:: QJ .. I- >- Qi ~~ ~ a.;", ;:, t-4 0 u>- ..c: ~l! ........ ...-I Ii ...-I ....,. ~~ 15- ~ 0 <d" ia:: i~ ! ~ t-4 QJ t- QJ t-4 C '" 'r- f 0) C QJ a:: W +J C QJ ~ "'C ;:, +J V') to- ........ I 0) cO) 'r- C ~'r- ~ QJC QJC CIt! &LI 'r- r- Q O'l 0- s: UJ Central Contra Costa sanitary District March 2, 1989 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CATHRYN FREITAS ~ JOYCE McMILLAN ~ REQUEST FOR SEASONAL EMPLOYEE I have reviewed my requirements for temporary seasonal employees and have identified the need for one employee. This person will be needed until approximately September 1989 to assist with the transfer of records to the inactive records storage area and other tasks related to the records management program. In addition, this employee will provide vacation relief for the Adminis- trative Aide. -< Attachment ,---~.,-"-,","-_.,.._,.. ,.,....,-'_._--+-----_._------_._-,-,-",._.__.~---_. ,.,._----_......_---_._-'-_.._.<_.__._._._~_._-_._---------- ~ e J1 ~~~ !~~ iU-,S CI) iU ~ I a: ~ . . ~ z ~~i enz II) ~iiU en Q ;i~ a:i=lf ~.... - ~ ~~ a,: en 0 ... Ll') (,)~ . il ~ ~ ~ ~~ Q) Q) ~ 3 .......... n III ~ ::I: 0 o::t ! ... ~ ... r- en Itl f u ..... a: ~ Q) I r- <..J Q) ~ ~ ~ l+- I 0 >,~ ~ U ~ Itl..... ~~ Q)~ ~ ~1Il u..... Q)C V) . REVISED Central Contra Costa Sanitary lJistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETXP<t~, 6, 1989 s~~VE AND CONSIDER PERSONNEL BUDGET REOJJESTS fOR fISCAL YEAR 1989-90 ~rx. PERSONNEL 3 DATE March 22, 1989 TYPE ~~'~E BUOOET S~~RYfreitas. Personnel Officer INIT\f.IINO QEPT./DIV. ^omlnls~ra~ive/Personnel SSUE: Staff has analyzed its personnel needs for Fi seal Year 1989-90 and is submitti ng its requests for Board consi derati on at the April 6th Board meeti ng. Final board approval is scheduled for the April 20th Board meeting. BACKGROUND: Each department has reviewed its staffing requirements for Fiscal Year 1989-90. The Personnel Budget includes memoranda from each department (Attachments I, II, III, IV, V & VI) with detailed explanations on the effect of these recommended staffing changes. The attached summary sheet (Attachment I) highlights each department's staffing requests and summarizes their effect on the number of total authorized positions in the District. As shown in the summary, the total number of authorized positions in the Di strict woul d increase by four (4) over 1 ast year; the number of requested new positi ons - ten (10) is parti ally offset by positi ons recommended for del eti on six (6). In addition to the increased number of positions, the salaries and wages in the 1989-90 0 & M Departmental Budgets will increase from the previous year due to the follow i ng: o Cost-of-l iv i ng salary adj ustments resul ti ng f rom the negoti ated Memoranda of Understandi ng. o Merit and longevity increases scheduled in 1989-1990; o Filling authorized positions which were vacant in 1988-1989; and o Positions authorized in 1988-1989 which were budgeted for a partial year because of the time required to fill positions. On Tuesday, March 21, 1989, the Personnel Committee met to review the proposed budget. The following Board authorizations and modifications to the District staffing charts were discussed at that meeting. Copies of the Personnel Budget will be distributed at the meeting of April 6, 1989, at which time a brief overview will be presented by the staff. Administrative Department 1. Add one Accounti n9 Techni ci an III, G-56, $2255-$2728. Ap r il 21, 1989. Recruitment effective INITIAT~T./DIV. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 CRF PM SUBJECT APPROVE PERSONNEl BUOOET REQUESTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 4'-1 March 22, 1989 2. Add one Accounting Supervisor, S-73, $3384-$4096. Recruitment effective April 21, 1989. Delete one Accounting Supervisor, 5-71, $3223-$3901. 3. Add one Senior Accountant/Internal Auditor, 5-71, $3223-$3901. 4. Reclassify Steve Elsberry, Accounting Supervisor, 5-71, $3223-$3901, to Senior Accountant/Internal Auditor, 5-71, $3223-$3901. 5. Add one Graph ics Techni ci an III, 6-64, $2718-$3290. Technician III, 6-64, $2718-$3290. Del ete one Engi neeri ng 6. Reclassify Ken Grubbs, Engineering Technician III, 6-64, $2718-$3290 to Graphics Technician III, G-64, $2718-$3290. 7. Adopt revised cl ass description for Graphics Technician 1111, 6-52, $2044-$2470 and G60, $2470-S2989. (, Collection Systeal Operations Depan:.ent 8. Delete one Vehicle & Equipment Service Worker, 6-45, S1736 - S2093. 9. Add one Vehicle & Equipment Mechanic, 6-62, $2593 - S3136. 10. Add three positions of Maintenance Crew Leader, 6-65, S2780-$3369, on a temporary basis for the period June 15, 1989 to October 15, 1989. Current employees will be provisionally appointed to these positions. 11. Add one Construction Equipment.Operator, 6-62, S2593 - $3136, effective April 21, 1989 for the duration of the drought-related water use restrictions in the EBMUD service area. Pl ant Operations Department 12. Delete one Laboratory Technician, 6-59, $2413 - $2918. 13. Add one Junior Engineer, 6-67, $2918 - $3532. 14. Add one Laboratory Superi ntendent, 5-80, S3999-$4845. Del ete one Laboratory Superintendent, 5-77, $3720-S4506. 15. Add one Seni or Chanist, S-73, $3384-$4096. Del ete one Seni or Chemist, S-71, $3223-$3901. 16. Add one Chemist II II, 6-62, $2593 - $3136 and G-67, $2918~ $3532. Del ete the previous salary of Chemist II, 6-65, $2780-$3369. 13028-9/85 SUBJECT APPROVE PERSONNEL BUDGET REQUESTS FOR FISCAl YEAR 1988-89 POSITION PAPER PAGE 3 OF 4- DATE ~1arch 22, 1989 Engineering Depart.ent 17. Delete one Wastewater Control Technician, G-60, $2470 - $2989. 18. Add two Source Control Inspectors, G-60, $2470-$2989. 19. Reclassify Leslie Kaduk, Wastewater Control Technician, G-60, $2470-$2989, to Source Control Inspector, G-60, $2470-$2989. Co-op Program 20. Authorize the hiring of students to fill 9 positions in the Co-op Program. RECXM4ENDATION: Receive and consi der the Personnel Budget for Fi scal Year 1989 - 1990 herei n identified by items' one through twenty. The budget will be submitted for final approval at the April 20, 1989 Board Meeting. \ ",-. 13028-11/85 C LLJ VI ...... >- LLJ c:: " Ilea He: -- I- Ii z: w :E :z: u < l- I- t < A i a i r;- I .. ... ~ " i ~'i ... .. 8 - ~ :; " < " Ilea He: iE ~:J <C/J I: ... i ... I i ... ; ... ; ... CD ... N 8 ~ ..... ... ... I I ! .... ~ ~ N ..... ~ ... ... - - .0 ... .... 'I J, (I) .... .... .... .c U '" tI e: I- 0 - 01 ~ C - ~ l c ::> 8 U < ... .: !.. III ::> (I) 8 01 - C ~ ~ - III e: i. ::> 0 ~ ... I .I.. -> e: _ -~ c! ~~ <~ -- " ! a s ~ ... I ~ eo ..... ..... ... -- ~ 0\ a N ... ~ .... ... --- -- . ~ . ~ ~ ... ... .... ... ~ ~ 0 ... N .... .- 0 ..... .0 0 .- --- ---- 8 8 Sl .0 .0 .oN ... S <0 .... N 0\ }O\ ~ ..... ~m 8 0 . m eo CD N N ~ ... ~ ~ eo 0\ 0\ ..... .... .... .... ........ .... . .... N N ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... .... ... .... .... .... .... et et I I I let I .Jr I J. cL I c!. .0 Sl Sl ~ 0 0 ... ... .... Sl... eo N 0\ ... r;;: ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~g: N .... .... 0\ 0\ 0 ... .... .... .... .... N N N .... ... ... .... .... ........ .... .... .... .... ... .... .... .; .; - - N - - - - - - - - .; .... N N.... ... .... .... 2 .... 0 .0 .0 ~ .0 .0 .0 .0 .... .... .... .0 .0 f c!, c!, c!, c!, c!, c!,c!, I I I I c!, J, <fl (I) <fl <fl CI .- +' C .... c .... . 1: .... ! !.. ... . - +' . '0 .c. ::> '" ::> . U <T .... - <fl C ... <D UJ .... i 0. +' I- ....... ~ c '" 0 04 .... 6 c 8~ '" u 0 .... ~ .- +' ~ Bt ~c '" ... '" ... .c. UIII - 0 ... 0 a. -.&: i C 0 - ...!.. III .c.U .c c ::> '" ... <DOlI .c. <D ... ::> OC CI >:z: 0 <fl ...J ., <fl .... ... ... ... ... ... ... N -- 1----- -. -- .... c .... ... .... ~ u c c '0 ~ . C L ! ... U ij !.. ~ . _ ... ~ c I- ::> 011 {! '" ::> 8 <T-" - <fl 01 UJ'" i c 0 ~ :>. ... c 0 - 04~ 6 ... . III ... 0 0 ~- <D <D. ~ ~ III U . ~U '" ... '" .- c u- ... 0 ... tiC 0. ~t 0 - 0 ~.c. .c c .c ",u c . . '" . '" .... UJ > <fl ...J <fl ...J ~I- ... ... ... ... ... ... -- ----- f--. .- 01 t c 1: l'1: <D "'~ d ~ . ~'" c .- en c 0. "'0 '" U 0 0: c .... UJ (/)0 -- ---- .... .... . .... .... o o ... 8 .... .... I ~ .... ... - .... J; - ... .... I <fl .: !.. ::> <fl 01 C ~ C ::> 8 ~ ... .....0 ~~ c_ ...... +,::> c< ::> 8-;;; uc <... . .+, ...C <fl .... ... ... ..... 8 ..... ~CD c ~eo - eo III -eo .c.0\ ceo .c. 0\ a. ... .eo a.... '" I +'0\ '" I ...... c... ...... 01- - I ca- E "'... E .....c :1:- ....c E ... - ... ...- 0 o~ 0 c'i ~ c c. oc 0.... oc _c -.... _c +'0 +'..... ~~ -'" -.... ...... . ... ~... .... ...... -8:t ..a. '" 0 ~ Illca Ill'" 1ll0l ~~ ~~ t~ .~ ~ c ~... ~c ... - "'0 ... - ; . ... ~8 .... 0:: a. 0::0. ~ 0 . . z: . . . * .0001 ... '" c _0 al_ c+' -0_ "'- '" c~ 0 i~UiQ. +'00.. _0.0 (/) ~~ J. 0.11I0 t...15+, ...e_c:: "'~~CD ~<D_-o III ...::> oA~~ .... o ~ & 0\ .... ... . I .00\ ~g: ... 0\'" co. O\~ ...'" et! co <T 0\ CD "'0:: 01 01 cc ... ... ... ... III '" ~~ <fl <fl ... ... . . ~~ ...... 00 .c. .&: ~~ << ~~ 00 1-1-