HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 05-04-89
.
Centra :ontra Costa Sanitar~ .listrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 27
POSITION PAPER BOARD MEEm~04, 1989
sJ!ti3(IC HEARING TO RECEIVE PWLIC COMtENT ON THE
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO TITLE 4, CHAPTER 4.04.010 -
4.28.030 OF THE DISTRICT CODE BY ORDINANCE AND TO
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE PROPOSED REVISIONS
NO.
III. HEARINGS 1
DATE April 25, 1989
TYPE ~ PUBLIC
HEARING
SlJl3MITTED BY
~~nryn Radin Frei~s, Personnel Officer
INITI.I\.TINQ,DE:.PTjDIVt. i ,Ip 1
^amlnl~ra ve, ersonne
ISSUE: The Board of Di rectors has schedul ed a publ ic heari ng for May 4, 1989, to
consider revisions to Title 4, Chapter 4.04 of the District Code relating to general
personnel provisions and to consider adoption of an ordinance incorporating the
proposed revisions.
BACKGROUND: As part of the District's overall effort to revise the District Code,
Deputy General Manager Paul Morsen, District Labor Counsel Gerald Lucey, and
Personnel Officer Cathryn Radin Freitas have reviewed Title 4 of the Code.
Suggested changes are delineated in the attached copy of the Code. The changes are
generally either clerical in nature, i.e. changing the title of the Administrative
Department Manager to Deputy General Manager, or rel ate to consi stency with the
current Memoranda of Understanding, past practice, or recent legal rulings.
Deputy District Counsel Kent Alm has reviewed and approved the proposed revisions as to
form.
Notice of the public hearing has been published in the Contra Costa Times on April
19, and May 1, 1989.
Copies of the revised Code have been sent to the affected employee bargaining
groups.
Upon approval of the ordinance for adoption, the ordinance will be published once in
the Contra Costa Times and w ill be effective upon expi rati on of the week of
publ ication.
RECOMtENDATION: 1) To conduct a publ ic hearing on May 4, 1989, to receive publ ic
comment on the proposed revisions to District Code, Title 4, Chapter 4.04.010 -
4.28.030; 2.) To review and adopt an ordinance incorporating the revisions to
District Code Title 4, Chapter 4.04.010 - 4.28.030.
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
R./C1F ENG.
I~
OGER J. DOLAN
QM
1302A-9/85 CRF
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
May 4, 1989
SUBJ ECT :
BOARD OF DIRECTORS ~~
PAUL K>RSEN, DEPUTY GENERAL MAN,6GER~
-"
CATHRYN FREITAS, PERSONNEL OFFICERrUJJ
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 4 OF THE DISTRICT CODE
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
Earlier this week the bargaining units reviewed the proposed revisions to
Title 4 of the District Code and have suggested the following amendments.
The amendments are acceptable to staff and Deputy District Counsel.
4.16.060 - Retain "for good reason." The section
shoul dread:
4.16.060 Duration of eligibility list. An
establ ished 1 ist shall be effective for one year
unless depleted or extended by the District, but in
no event shall exceed two years. The District may
abolish or extend any eligibility list for oood
reason. If the 1 i st is extended, the total 1 ife of
the list may not be extended beyond two years. COrd.
142 (part), 1980: prior code 54-406)
4.16.130.B - Delete "the first six months of." The
section should read:
B. If a promoted, regul ar anployee is found to be
unabl e to adequately perform under the increased
responsibil ity of the new position during ~e ~4":t
e4.x IAQ.A~. Qf the probati onary peri od, the anployee
may demote back to the previ ously hel d posi ti on.
<Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord. 110 55,1975: prior
code 54-415)
Please consider the revisions to Title 4 as amended.
Ti tl e 4
PERSONNEL
Chapters:
4.04 General Provisions
4.08 Affirmative Action - Equal Onportunity
4.12 Classifications
4.16 Examinations and Appointments
4.20 Layoffs
4.24 Employer-Employee Relations
4.28 Sexual Harassment
Chapter 4.04
GEN ERAL PROV I S ION S
Secti ons:
4.04.010
4.04.020
4.04.030
Declaration of policies
Establ ishment of merit system
Board authorizati on of pesi ti ons
appointments
and
recogni ti on
of
4.04.010 Decl aration of pol icies. A. It is the pol icy of the
District to evaluate and select employees on the basis of merit and to
determine individual merit through performance and competitive
exami nati ons.
B. In return for faithful service, District employees are entitled
to ~8e.QA~b~Q .Q~~~~~~ of ~QA~~Q~ regular empl~ee status. ~Q~~~Q
Regul ar employee status shall be dependent upon good performance, good
behavior, efficiency, necessity of work and the appropriation of
sufficient funds. The acts and decisions of the District regarding the
/
.~,._..__._......._-,_..._____.____...,..<._._~_.,_~"___..__'_.~.. _____._..,,_~.,_".. ___.__. ..___d...~___~._,..,_._._______" ,._._____m__'_"_~_____.__~A_.'_'._ ,~._..._.___._..._.._.__._....____.,_____
selection of individuals shall be in accordance with thb t->ractices and
pol ici es establ i shed under th i s chapter. <Ord. 142 (part), 1980: pri or
code S4-10l>
4.04.020 Establ ishment of merit system. The merit ~stem and staff
positions, as classified in the manner prescribed in this chapter, are
established. Every classified position is under the merit ~stern. (Ord.
142 (part), 1980: Ord. 114 (part), 1976: prior code S4-102)
4.04.030 Board authorization of positions and recognition of
appointments. The Board shall authorize all positions provided in this
chapter and shall be advised on all appointments to all such positions.
<Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord. 130 (part), 1978: prior code S4-103)
Chapter 4.08
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION - EQU,4L OPPORTUNITY
Secti ons:
4.08.010
4.08.020
4.08.030
Affirmative action.
Equal opportunity.
Dissemination of policy.
4.08.010 Affirmative action. It is the policy of the District to
have an affirmative action program which is a program of equal
opportunity pol icies and affirmative action procedures of the Central
Contra Costa Sanitary District. It is consistent with prior District
standards and pol ici es of equal opportuni ty and foll ows and impl ernents
the requi rements of the Office of Fp.deral Contract Compliance rul es
issued pursuant to Executive Order 11246, and of the Civil Rights Act of
1964. The program includes policies and procedures for the communication
of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District equal opportunity pol icy;
formal internal and external dissemination of our policy; establishment
of responsibil ities for the implementation of the affirmative action
program; identification of areas of under-util ization of minorities by
"2-
_._.------_.._----,~.~_.__._~.._-_._--- ""---'-'--.---"-"--.--"-"-"'-"""'--"-""'-."-,._._.._-~.~.-
organization units and Job categories; establ ishment goals and
objectives by organization units and job category, development and
execution of action-oriented programs designed to eliminate
under-utilization and further designed to attain established goals and
objectives; design and implanentation of internal audit and reporting
systems, and active support of local and national community action
programs in the area of equal opportunity. COrd. 142 (part), 1980: Ord.
114 (part), 1976: prior code S4-201)
4.08.020 Equal opportunity. It is the pol icy of the Sanitary
District to:
A. Recruit, hire and/or promote for all job classifications without
regard to race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, marital
status, age, sex or non-job-related physical handicap or medical
conditions;
B. Base decision of anployment upon an individual's qualifications
as related to the position being filled;
C. Make promotion decisions on the individual's qualifications as
related to the requirements of the position for which the anployee is
being considered;
D. Insure that all other personnel acti ons such as compensati on,
benefits, transfers, 1 ayoffs, returns from 1 ayoffs, Di stri ct-sponsored
trai ni ng, educati on, tui ti on assi stance, soci al and recreati on programs,
will be administered without regard to race, rel igion, color, national
ori gi n, ancestry, mari tal status, age, sex or non-job-rel ated physical
handicap or medical condition;
E. Consider all anployees and all appl icants as fellow human beings
entitled to equal consideration and treatment in every respect;
F. Continue to sustain and develop an implementing, reporting, and
auditing systan that insures the maintenance and appl ication of District
standards;
G. When contracting for supplies or service, to continue to do so
without regard to race, religion, color, national orlgln, ancestry,
marital status, age, sex or non-job-related physical handicap or medical
condition. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord. 114 (part), 1976: prior code
~4-202)
3
4.08.030 Dissemination of pol icy. In order that the equal
opportunity and affirmative action pol icies of the District are
understood and known within the communities in which the Sanitary
District operates, the following activities have and will be undertaken:
A. The sections of the District code on equal opportunity and
affirmative action will be made available to all the individual employees
of the Sanitary District;
B. Copies of the District affirmative action policy will be
mai ntai ned ~ .per:IN.RQJ:lU~ .~~,;f.x~ b~~~Iil;U.R boe.r:d. in the Personnel
Office, and displayed in areas frequented by substantial numbers of
employees and where i niti al contract with appl icants for employment and
the general publ ic is made. Copies of the affirmative action pol icy are
avail abl e to employees by request.
C. On appropriate occasions special meetings will be held for the
future dissemination and implementation of the affirmative action
program.
D. In advertising, for District personnel, an equal opportunity
clause will be included. (Ord. 142 (oart), 1980: Ord. 114 (part), 1976:
prior code S4-203)
Chapter 4.12
QASSIFICATIONS
Secti ons:
4.12.010
4.12.020
4.12.030
4.12.040
4.12.050
Adoption of class descriptions and salaries.
Standards of establishing class of employment.
Description of classifications.
Change of classifications.
Employment status.
4.12.010 Adoption of class descriptions and salaries. Class
descriptions covering all positions of District employment, and a
schedule of salaries for each position, shall be approved, amended and
'-/
adopted, or abolished by the Board of Directors. (Ord. 152 (part), 1983:
Ord. 142 (part), 1980: pri or code S4-30l>
4.12.020 Standards of establ ishing class of anployment. Each class
of anployment shall include positions sufficiently similar in respect to
duties and responsibilities so that the same descriptive title may be
used to designate each position allocated to the class. The same
qualifications and tests of fitness for appointment and the same salary
range shall apply. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior code S4-302)
4.12.030 Description of classifications. Each class description
shall specify the general duties and responsibil ities and the desired
qual ifications for each position in the cl ass. However, the description
of duti es does not 1 imit the authori ty of ei ther the General Manager -
Chief Engineer or the Board to assign other duties or to direct and
control the work of anployees. <Ord. 142 (nart), 1980: prior code
S4-303 )
4.12.040 Change of classifications. The Board may amend or abolish
a class and it may establish, amend or abolish provisions relating to a
class or positions within a class. A copy of any revised or amended
class description shall be available for review in the personnel section.
<Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior code ~4-304)
4.12.050 Employment status. The Di stri ct anploys persons in four
different ki nds of status. These are temporary, .p~IAa.Q.eA.t=.p.o1l4l.t.:tQ.Q4l.;t
regul ar-probat1onary, .p~me.Q~:t regul ar and .p~.Q~:t regul ar part-time.
<Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior code ~4-305)
Chapter 4.16
EXAMINATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
Sections:
4.16.010 Examinations.
,,--
~
4.16.020
4.16.030
4.16.040
4.16.050
4.16.060
4.16.070
4.16.080
4.16.090
4.16.100
4.16.110
4.16.120
4.16.130
4.16.140
Grounds for disqualification.
Appeal in case of disqual ification.
Grading standards.
Medical report.
Duration of eligibility list.
Remov al from el i gi bil i ty 1 i st.
Appo i ntments
Temporary appoi ntments.
Special emergency appointments.
Provisional appointments.
Delegation of authority.
Probationary period.
Limits to appeal rights.
4.16.010 Exami nati ons. A. Except for those Board appoi nted
positions identified in Section 4.16.080 A, the District shall hold an
examination(s) to establish an eligibility list for appointments to each
class of position to be filled.
B. The examination shall be oral or written or a demonstration of
physical ability or skills or any combination thereof. Each examination
shall test objectively the skills, knowledge and ability necessary for
the posi ti on to be fill ed.
C. Examinations are categorized as follows:
1. Personnel Advancement Examination(s). The District shall
provide a personnel advancement procedure to allow employees who qual ify
to advance to a designated higher level, nonsupervisory position for
those cl asses where the personnel advancement pol icy is in effect.
2. Promotional examinations. In the case of positions other
than those identified in Section 4.16.080A, as being Board-appointed,
promotional examinations will take place when, (a) no current eligibility
1 i st exi sts and/or the personnel advancement procedure is not in order
and, (b) when it is determined that there is a need to fill such
positions, and k) when there are at least four qual Hied District
pe~ma~eQt regular employees or fj~e four qualified District
pe~ma~e~t regular management support/~onfidential employees who are
currently occupying position(c;) at the same or lower pay range and who
~
appl ied for such positions, (d) that the candidate selection process
meets affirmative action guidel ines prescribed under Section 4.08.010.
If a promotional examination is authorized, qualified temporary employees
may also take the examination.
3. Open Examinations. If the position(s) cannot be fill ed
using the examination categories set out in subsections CO) and (2) of
this section, examinations shall be held on an open basis.
An examination and the resulting eligibility list may involve
District personnel and/or members of the general public.
4. Speci al Appoi ntments. In the case of Boa rd-appoi nted
positions, as defined in Section 4.16.080A, the appointment on a
case-by-case basis. COrd. 152 (part), 142 (part), 1980: prior code
S4-401)
4.16.020 Grounds for disqualification. The District may refuse to
examine, or after examination may disqualify an applicant, or it may
remove his or her name from an eligibility list, on any of the following
grounds:
A. That the appl icant does not meet the minimum qual ifications of
the posi ti on;
B. That the appl icant does not successfully pass each part of the
examination procedure;
C. That physical handicap, medical condition, or medical
di sabl ement lIlbicb makes a person unfit to perform the duti es of the
position and reasonable accommodation by the District cannot be .ade;
D. That a documented history of behavior which when considered in
the 1 ight of the particul ar duties of the position appl ied for renders
the person unfit to perform the duties. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior
code S4-402)
4.16.030 Appeal in case of disqual ification. If an appl icant is
disqualified as provided under Section 4.16.020, the applicant may appeal
to the Board. The appl icant shall, upon request to the Di strict, be
given grounds for the disqual ification. The Board may hold a hearing on
the matter of the disqualification. The action taken by the Board is the
final action. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior code S4-403)
:r
4.16.040 Grading standards. To qualify for appointment, an
appl icant must pass each part of an exami nati on. Exami nati ons shall be
prepared consistent with Section 4.08.010. District shall establ ish the
standards for grading an examination, prior to its administration, giving
consideration to the kind of examination, number of candidates, and the
needs of the District. The grading of an examination shall be under the
supervision of the Personnel Office 0.:: .u.Rd~ ~8 .upaP,t.;i..;iO.R of 4l.R
a9P~Gp~+a~Q 6Yp~Y+6~T (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord. 134, 1978: prior
code ~4-404)
4.16.050 Madi cal report. Each candi date for appoi ntment shall be
subject to a medical examination and report by a licensed physician
sel ected by the Di strict. The purpose of the medical report is to
establ ish the physical fitness of prospective employees for the position
offered. The District will pay the cost for the initial medical
examination and required report. The examination shall be conducted
within one month prior to appointment. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior
code ~4-405)
4.16.060 Duration of eligibility list. An established list shall
be effective for one year unl ess depl eted or extended by the Di strict,
but in no event shall exceed two years. The District may abolish or
extend any el igibil ity 1 ist .to.,: good ":84l.oR. If the 1 ist is extended,
the total life of the list IlaY not be extended beyond two years. COrd.
142 (part), 1980: prior code ~4-406)
4.16.070 Removal from eliQibility list. The District may remove
the name of a person from an el igibil ity 1 ist for any cause set forth in
Secti on 4.16.020 or for the foll ow i ng:
A. Failure to respond to notice within five days after the District
(10 receives verification of receipt of certified mail, or (2) determines
that the individual cannot be located after making a reasonable effort to
do so;
B. Request by appl icant that hi s/her name be removed from the
eligibility list;
~
c. Refusal by the applicant to accept permanent appointment offered
by the District. (Qrd. 148 (nart), 1981: Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior
code S4-407)
4.16.080 Appoi ntments. A. Management 1 evel posi ti ons
including, but not limited to: D~partment and division managers, and the
finance, personnel and purchasing officers are Board appointed positions
and, such appointments shall be so adopted by resolution.
B. The Di stri ct shall make all other staff 1 evel appoi ntments from
the appropriate District eligibility list. The appointment may be
offered to one of the three candidates having current highest standing on
the eligibility list. If a current eligibility list has less than three
candidates remaining on the list, appointment may be offered to the
remaining one or two eligible candidates or the list may be abolished.
.I~ ~ 8+.:J.g.:J.9.:J.+.;I.t~ +.:J..:I; .;I.. Jaot .),t..:i.+.b+8. The Di strict may ei ther make
a temporary appointment, an emergency appointment, or a provisional
appointment as provided in Sections 4.16.090, 4.16.100 and 4.16.110.
(Ord. 152 (part), 1983; Ord. 149 (nart), 1981; Ord. 148 (part), 1981:
Ord. 142 (Dart), 1980: prior code S4-409)
4.16.090 Temporary appointments. The District may fran time to
time requi re the services of temporary work forces to perform those
duties and responsibilities normally performed by existing personnel. A
temporary appointment is limited to twelve months, except as specified in
Memorandum of Understandi ng and does not qual ify the appoi ntee for the
retirement plan, the insurance plans, vacation and sick leave allowances,
or other employment rights and benefits including those as defined in
Sect; on 4.16.140 made avai 1 abl e to anployees of the other statuses. The
Board may establ ish a rate of compensati on for a temporary anployee
different from that of a p~ma~eQt regular employee.
A. The Board may create specific temporary classes at their
discretion with compensation and benefits to be determined by the Board.
<Ord. 152 (part), 1983: Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord. 110 H, 1975: Ord.
55 (part), 1964; prior code S4-411)
~
4.16.100 Special emergency appointments. If the District finds
that there is a threatening stoppage of public business, it may make an
emergency appoi ntment effective for a peri od of ni nety worki ng days. An
appointee may receive not more than two successive emergency appointments
for an effective total combined maximum appointment period of one hundred
eighty working days. A special emergency appointee shall be considered a
temporary employee as described in Section 4.16.090. Such appointments
are considered additional positions, and as made by the District, shall
be confirmed by the Board at its earliest possible convenience. (Ord.
152 (part), 1983: Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord. 138 (nart), 1978: Ord.
110 ~2, 1975: prior code ~4-412)
4.16.110 Provisional appointments. The District may appoint an
exi sti ng employee to a vacated authorized posi ti on, on a provi si onal
basis, for a period generally not less than 30 days nor .ore than te
QXc~ six months' duration. The appoi nted employee mayor may not be
on an established eligibility list for that position. The provisional
appointment does not grant to any individual so appointed any permanent
rights to the position or rel inquish any rights to the position held by
that employee prior to such appointment. <Ord. 142 (part), 1980: Ord.
138 (part), 1978: Ord. 110 S3, 1975: prior code ~4-413)
4.16.120 Delegation of authority. The Board delegates to the
General Manager Chief Engineer the authority to conduct those
employment and personnel-related activities, including but not limited to
those matters covered by Sections 4.12.030, 4.16.010, 4.16.020, 4.16.040,
4.16.060, 4.16.070, 4.16.080B, 4.16.090, 4/16.100, 4.16.110 and 4.16.130.
COrd. 152 (part), 1983: Ord. 142 (nart), 1980: Ord. 138 (part), 1978:
Ord. 112 H, 1975: Ord. 110 ~4, 1975: prior code ~4-414)
4.16.130 Probationary period. A. Each person appointed to a
.pQ+IR4.Q~.t regul ar or p~IR4.Q~t regul ar part-time positi on shall serve
a probationary period which shall not be less than six months nor more
than twelve months. During the probation period an employee may be
di smi ssed without cause by ei ther the Board or the General Manager -
Chief Engineer with the approval of the Board. This discharge is at the
It)
sole discretion of the District with no recourse under the grievance or
appeals provision.
B. If a promoted, p~JR.a-R&R~ regular employee is found to be
unabl e to adequately perform under the increased responsibil ity of the
new position during the first six months of the probationary period, the
employee may demote back to the previously held position. (Ord.142
(part), 1980: Ord. 110 S5, 1975: prior code S4-415)
4.16.140 . Limits to appeal rights. An employee having an employment
status as provided in Sections 4.16.090, 4.16.100 or 4.16.130 shall not
have the ri ghts of appeal to the Board incase of a suspensi on, demoti on
or dismissal. (Ord. 152 (part), 1983: prior code S4.416)
Chapter 4.20
LAYOFFS
Secti ons:
4.20.010
4.20.020
4.20.030
4.20.040
Grounds for layoff.
Preference where position is reestablished.
Layoff by displacement.
Seniority.
4.20.101 Grounds for layoff. A. Any anployee(s) may be laid off
when the position(c:) is no longer necessary, or for reasons of economy,
or lack of work, or lack of funds, or if the position can be consolidated
with another position, or for such reason(c;) that the Board of Directors
deems sufficient for abolishing the position(s).
B. However, in the case of consol idation, the salary range for the
higher classification may prevail when an employee is currently occupying
that consolidated position. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior code S4-501)
4.20.020 Preference where position is reestablished. If the Board
abolished a position and within two years of abolishment, either: (1)
reestablishes the position, or (2) creates a new position which involves
/1-
substantially the same or comparable duties and responsibilities
previously performed, or (3) approves of a positional classification
previously occupied or at a lesser classification level with
qual if icati on requi rements and experi ence possessed by the person 1 ai d
off, the person who occupied such position before it was abol ished shall
have preference on the el igibil ity 1 ist created for such position. (Ord.
142 (part), 1980: prior code S4--502)
4.20.030 Layoff by displacement. A. In Same Class.
1. When a reduction in force becomes necessary, layoff shall be
accompl ished in inverse order of total District seniority within the
affected cl ass except as may be provided by appl icabl e federal or state
regul ations. For purposes of this rul es, total District seniority shall
be defined as in Section 4.20.040. An employee's t&~U~Q regular
employee status in a class is his/her length of service in that
classification and service in any higher classification.
2. Before any pQ+IR4~~.:t regul ar employee in an affected cl ass is
laid off, all appointees working in affected classes in the same
department under emergency, temporary, or probationary appointments shall
be separated from District employment.
3. Any employee subj ect to 1 ayoff as a resul t of bei ng in a
promotional probationary status in a new department may be allowed to
demote in lieu of layoff to the employee's former classification and
department as identified in the organization chart.
B. Demotion to Lower Class. An employee in a classification
affected by a reduction in force may, in lieu of layoff, elect to demote
to a lower classification, provided that such employee had held ~""~&
regul ar employee status in the lower cl assif icati on. When both the
employee demoting and the employee in the lower paying class have equal
total District service, the employee in the lower paying classification
woul d be 1 ai d off or demoted fi rst. Reducti on in force or demoti on in
lieu of layoff in one department shall not affect employees in another
department.
C. Notification of Layoff. Notice of layoff shall be given to all
but temporary and emergency employees at least thirty calendar days prior
to he effective date of layoff.
/A
D. Duration of Reemployment List. Names of persons laid off shall
be carried on a reemployment list for twenty-four months. If, after a
layoff, the working force is increased, the District shall offer each
appointment from the established reemployment list in reverse order of
layoff, hiring the most recently laid off first. Persons appointed to
'~lNfl9flt regul ar posi ti ons of the same cl assif icati on and status as
previously held, shall be dropped from the list. Persons reemployed in a
lower classification or on a temporary or part-time basis shall be
continued on the list for the higher ~9-FlNfl9fl* regular position. Any
person rej ecti ng an offer of reemployment to a previ ousl y hel d
~e.l:lRaJ:leJ:lt regular position of the same classification and status shall
be dropped from the list. Any person who does not respond within five
worki ng days to a certH i ed 1 etter offeri ng such anployment shall be
dropped from the 1 i st, unl ess a suffici ent reason is given. <Ord. 148
(part), 1981: Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior code S4-S03)
E. A 1 ayoff shall not be subj ect to appeal.
4.20.040 Seniority. An employee's seniority at the District is
based upon total length of continuous service in the District's employ,
regardless of position or class in other than temporary anployment
status. A layoff, Board authorized leave of absence, or termination and
subsequent reemployment within a six-month period is not considered a
break in continuous service and therefore can be used to bridge two
interrupted periods of District employment, however, break in service
time is not computed in total seniority. (Ord. 142 (part), 1980: prior
code S4-S04)
Chapter 4.24
EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Secti ons:
4.24.010 Policy.
4.24.020 Employee ri ghts.
IS
_.A__"'_....__.....___... ._~.~."..._______._____...___________~___.____,__."._,_._"______________.___~__.__..._.~_,_________.__.__.________
4.24.030
4.24.040
4.24.050
4.24.060
4.24.070
4.24.080
4.24.090
4.24.100
4.24.110
Representation unit - General provisions.
Certification of employee organization.
Modification of established representation unit.
Decertification of employee organization.
Individual employees.
Val idi ty.
Employees meeting on District time.
Meet and confer process.
Admi ni strati on of emp1 oyer/ employee ordi nance.
4.24.010 Policy. A. In the interest of the public, the employees,
and the employer, it is the policy of the Sanitary District to promote
sound personnel management, to estab1i sh uniform procedures for
employees, whether individually or in organization, to participate in the
process of communication toward establishing wages, hours, and other
terms and conditions of employment, and to provide the means for amicable
discussion and adjustment of matters of mutual interest, with the intent
of fostering harmonious employer/employee relations and in conformance
with state 1egis1 ation (Government Code Sections 3500 through 3509) as
currently in effect or as amended in the future.
B. Toward achi evi ng these obj ectives, the emp1 oyer/employee
relations policies and procedures set out in this chapter are provided.
These shall be used in determining representation units, recognizing
employee organizations, resolving disputes and governing employee
organization's activities on District property and District time. No
employee or group of employees or organizati on shall follow any other
procedure other than those set forth in this chapter on matters
pertaining to employer/employee relations. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982:
prior code S4-701)
4.24.020 Employee ri ghts. A. Each employee of the Sani tary
District, except elected officials, and the General Manager - Chief
Engineer, District Counsel and Secretary of the District shall have the
following rights:
1. To form, join, and participate in the activities of employee
organizations for the purpose of representation on all matters of
employee relations.
IY
B. No anployee shall be interfered with, intimidated, restrained,
coerced, or di scrimi nated agai nst because of exerci si ng these anployee
rights. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982: prior code S4-703)
4.24.030 Representation unit - General provisions. A. For the
purposes stated in this chapter, the District Board of Directors shall
establish appropriate representation units based upon the broadest
internal and occupational community of interest, history of
representation, and the effect of the unit on the efficient operation of
the District and sound employer/employee relations, subject to the
following limitations:
1. No District classification and no anployee shall be included in
more than one representation unit.
2. The following classifications are designated executive
management:
General Manager - Chief Engineer;
Counsel of the District;
Secretary of the District.
3. The management group anployees shall represent thansel ves in
matters of wages, benefits, and worki ng condi ti ons with the Board of
Directors and shall not be included in the same representation unit with
nonmanagement anployees or management support/confidential anployees.
Classifications within the unit are adopted by resolution of the Board of
Di rectors.
4. The management support/confidential representation unit is
recognized as the bargaining unit for all management support and
confidenti al employees and management support and confi denti al employees
shall not be included in the same representation unit with nonmanagement
or nonconfidential anployees. Classifications within this unit are
adopted by resolution by the Board of Directors.
5. Professional employees shall be included in a representation
unit with nonprofessional employees unless, in a vote of all affected
professional employees, a majority of such professional employees voting
in a secret ballot election vote not to be included in such a unit.
/~
Certif i cati on of employee organizati ons representi ng a un i t composed of
professional employees shall follow the provisions of Section 4.24.040.
6. The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Employees'
Associ ati on Publ ic Employees' Local Number One is recognized as the
bargai ni ng un i t for all general employees other th an those assi gned to
other representation units.
B. The ad~~~.~~~~~Q dQ9~~~MeA~ me~~gQ~, Deputy General
Manager, using the criteria set forth in this chapter, shall make the
initial determination of all questions that may arise as to whether
classifications or employees included in a representation unit are in
fact management, professional, management support/confidential employees,
or general employees. Any acti on of the ad~~~.~.~~Q dQ.pa~.:bAQ~~
lR4~agQ~ Deputy General Manager in determi ni ng issues contai ned in th is
secti on which are not sati sfactory to the employee organizati on (s) shall
be resolved in the meet and confer process and where that process fails,
through the State Conciliation Service as described in Section 3507.1 of
the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982: prior code S4-704)
4.24.040 Certif icati on of employee organizati on. A. An employee
organization may be certified as the exclusive representative of a
representation unit for the purposes stated in this chapter.
B. Any employee organization that meets the following minimum
requirements may petition, in writing, during the month of October during
the final year of a memorandum of understanding, to represent the
employees in a representation unit as established in Section 4.24.030 or
Section 4.24.050. These requirements are to be filed with the
adm~~~..~~a~~Q dQ9a~~~ Deputy General Manager in a statement of
representation, signed by the presiding officer of the employee
organization, and shall state, certify and/or include the following:
1. The name and address of the organizati on and the names, ti tl es,
and addresses of its current officers; and
2. That employee organization is or is not a chapter or local of,
or affiliated directly with, a regional or state or national or
international organization and, if so, the name and address of each such
regional, state, or international organizations; and
/b
3. A copy of the employee organization's adopted constitution
and/or bylaws; and
4. The organization has membership among District employees; and
5. The organization has no restriction on membership based on race,
color, creed, national origin, sex, age; or eligible employment in any
classification contained within the representation unit; and
6. A statement that the employee organization has in its possession
written proof, dated within thirty calendar days of the date upon which
the petition is filed, to establish that thirty-five percent of the
eligible employees within the representation unit have designated the
employee organi zati on to represent them in thei r employment rel ati ons
with the District. Such written proof shall be submitted for
confirmation to the adminjst&ati~e depa&tment Deputy General Manager.
C. The Board of Directors shall require holding a secret ballot
election by the State Conciliation Service, or as mutually agreed upon by
the District and all employee organizations concerned. This secret
ballot election must be held no sooner than twenty calendar days after
the final determination of the appropriate representation unit or units,
and not more than forty cal endar days after such determi nati on. The
District and the employee organizations concerned shall meet and confer
on the procedures for conducting an election by eligible employees. Such
employee elections shall be held within an established representation
unit to determine majority wishes regarding the choice of an employee
organization, or resolve conflicting claims, upon petition by thirty-five
percent or more of the eligible employees in an established
representation unit In any representation election, the choice of no
organization shall be on the ballot unless there is a runoff election.
1. In an election where none of the choices receives a majority of
the valid ballots cast, a runoff election shall be conducted between the
two choices receiving the largest number of ballots cast.
2. There shall be no more than one certification election in a
twelve-month period within the same representation unit, except as
provided above for runoff elections.
3. An employee organization receiving a majority of the val id votes
cast in a representation election and has otherwise all the minimum
qual ifications as stated in paragraphs 1 through 6 of subsection B of
IF
this section, shall be certified by the Board of Directors as the
certif i ed employee organizati on for the establ i shed representati on uni t.
D. A decision of the Board of Directors dismissing a claim for
certificati on by an employee organizati on shall be val id and effective
for a period of one year. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982: prior code S4-705)
4.24.050 Modification of establ ished representation unit. A. A
petition for modification of a representation unit may be filed with the
.a"1R4-R45t~.at4.ye "ep.a~tffleRt Deputy General Manager between October 1st
and October 31st of the fi nal year of a memorandum of understandi ng. A
petition for modification of a representation unit may be filed by a
group of employees in a representation unit. Such petitions must contain
the signatures of fifty percent or more of the employees in a proposed
representation unit.
B. Such petition shall be based only upon substantial changes in
District functions, organizational structure or job classifications.
C. Such petition shall describe the proposed modified
representation unit based upon the classes within the classification plan
of the District and shall set forth the reasons for the proposed
modification.
D. The ed~A~.~~.~~~~ d~p.~~~A~ Deputy General Manager, using the
criteria set forth in this Chapter, shall determine if the representation
un it shoul d be mod if i ed. Any acti on of the .aQIR4R~5t~at4.ye Qepa~tfReR:t
Deputy General Manager in determining if a representation unit should be
modified may be contested by the employee organization(s) involved and
may be subject to the meet and confer process and where that process
fails, through State Conciliation Service per Section 3507.1 of the
Myers-Milias-Brown Act. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982: prior code S4-706)
4.24.060 Decertification of emplayee orQanization. A. A
decertification petition alleging that the incumbent certified employee
organization no longer represents a majority of the employees in an
established representation unit may be filed with the adfR~A4.:t~a~~.ye
depe.ctmeDt Deputy General Manager after the incumbent organizati on has
been recognized for at 1 east one full year. Such petiti on must be fil ed
with the edmiIljsuat.i~e departmeDt maIlage.c Deputy General Manager when
/8
the term of memorandum of understanding has less than one hundred twenty
days and more than ninety days remaining. Such a decertification
petition shall then contain the following information and documentation:
1. The name of the established representation unit and of the
incumbent certified employee organization sought to be decertified as the
representative of that unit;
2. An allegation that the incumbent certified employee
organization no longer represents a majority of the employees in the unit
and any other relevant and material facts relating thereto;
3. Proof of employee support that at least thirty-five percent
of the current employees in the unit no longer desire to be represented
by the incumbent certified employee organization;
4. When the decertification petition also requests
certification of another organization, then that petition shall include
those requirements as set forth in Section 4.24.040 (B) 1 through 6.
B. Upon recei pt of a decertif i cati on peti ti on, th e adJR.iJl.:i..;tJ::at.i~,fj
dlipa.r.tmeJlt Deputy General Manager shall pl ace the matter on the agenda
of the next regul arly schedul ed meeti ng of the Board of Di rectors. If
the employee petition is found to be valid, then the Board shall require
a secret ballot election by State Conciliation Service. The majority
representative shall be decertified if the results of a secret ballot
election show that employees of the unit no longer desire representation
by that organization, as indicated by the vote for "no organization" or
another recognized organizati on, as specif i ed in the voti ng cri teri a
ci ted in Secti on 4.24.040. In the event of a ti e vote, the incumbent
certified employee organization shall not be decertified. The results of
the election become binding and final.
C. A notice of decertification shall be sent by certified mail by
the ad~JI.:i..t~at.:i.~,fj d,fjpa.r~Jlt Deputy General Manager whenever an
employee organization is voted to be decertified by a majority of the
voting employees. The notice shall be delivered to the last known
officer(s) of the employee organization.
D. In the event the incumbent certified employee organization is
decertified, the decertification shall not negate the terms of the then
existing memorandum of understanding between the District and that
t-~
organization as acceptance of the terms of such a memorandum of
understanding shall be a condition required by the Board of Directors in
granting recognition to a new organization as the certified employee
organization for the representation unit. COrd. 150 (part), 1982: prior
code S4-70n
4.24.070 Individual employees. Nothing in this chapter shall be
construed to restrict or in any way modify the right of an individual
employee to present matter involving his/her employment relationship with
the District. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982: prior code S4-708)
4.24.080 Validity. A. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be
deemed to modify or abrogate exi sti ng ri ghts and responsi bl1iti es of the
District or its employees or employee organizations, to the extend they
are governed by law.
B. If any part or secti on of th is chapter is found to be contrary
to existing 1 aw or laws subsequently adopted by any court of proper
jurisdiction, the remainder shall not be affected thereby. (Ord. 150
(part), 1982: prior code S4-709)
4.24.090 Employees meeting on District time. A. District
employees shall be allowed to attend meetings held by the District during
regular working hours on District time only under the following
circumstances:
1. If their attendance is required at a specific meeting by
District management;
2. If thei r attendance is sought by the hearing officer for
presentation of testimony or other reasons;
3. If they are designated as an officer, shop steward or
member representative, in which case they may utilize a reasonabl e time
at each 1 evel of the proceed; ngs to ass; st an employee ; n process; ng a
grievance, but at all times must inform their immediate supervisor when
leaving and upon returning to work.
B. In addition, official representatives of a certified employee
organization(s) shall be allowed time off on District time for meeting
during regular working hours when formally meeting and conferring in good
"2-0
faith or consulting with District representativeCs) on matters within the
scope of representation; provided, that the number of such
representativeCs) shall not exceed four and that advance arrangements for
the time away from hi s/her work stati on or assi gnment are made with the
appropriate supervisor.
C. When formally meeting and conferring in good faith, District
Board representatives shall not exceed four members.
D. Employees who, duri ng the course of thei r workday are requi red
to accommodate assocati on-rel ated busi ness, shall report that, time on
their time sheet in an establ ished employee relations account. (Ord. 150
(part), 1982: pri or code ~4-710)
4.24.100 Meet and confer process. A. If a written request to meet
and confer is presented to or from an employee representative uni t or to
or from the District Board representatives, the two groups shall meet and
confer in good faith at a reasonable time and place in regard to matters
relating to wages, hours and conditions of employment. Each group shall
consider with open and flexible minds all proposals presented. However,
meeting and conferring in good faith does not in any way obligate either
party to make concessions or agree to proposals.
B. If agreement is reached between Board representative(s) and
representatives of the employee unitCc;), they shall jointly prepare and
sign a written memorandum of understanding, which shall not be binding on
either party. The employee representative(s) shall submit the memorandum
of understanding to his/her membership for ratification prior to
presenting it to the Board of Directors of the District for
consideration. Upon affirmative action of the District Board of
Directors, the memorandum of understanding becomes binding for the period
of time specified in the memorandum of understandi ng. Meet and confer
does not require the Board of Directors to agree to any proposal
submitted in a written memorandum of understanding nor does it protect
representation unit employees from any disadvantages which may result
from a wri tten memorandum of understandi ng reached between the Di strict
and employee representation unites).
C. Upon written notification by either party that negotiations are
deadlocked, the involved parties may mutually agree, upon the designation
],}-
of a mediator, who shall then conduct private mediation sessions with the
parties in an attempt to resolve the impasse. Unless otherwise agreed
to, mediation shall be conducted by the California Division of
Conciliation of the Department of I"dustrial Relations, or as otherwise
designated in Government Code Section 3507.1 or any other superseding
1 aw.
D. Costs of mediation shall be divided one-half to the District and
one-half to the recognized employee representation unit participating in
the mediation. (Ord. 150 (part), 1982: prior code S4-711)
4.24.110 Administration of anployer/employeeordinance. A. The
Di stri ct' s ad~J1..:i..:t+...:t..:h"Q depa+:.:tJr:IaR.:t Deputy General Manager shall be
the District's principal representative and spokesperson in all matters
covered under this Chapter and shall have the authority to administer or
delegate the administration of the provisions therein.
B. The rights of the District include, but are not limited to, the
excl usive right to determine the missions of its constituent departments
and divisions; set standards of services; determine the procedures and
standards of selection for anployment and promotion; direct and assign
its anployees; take disciplinary action; relieve its employees from duty
because of lack of work or for other legitimate reasons; maintain the
efficiency of District operations; determine the methods, means and
personnel by which District operations are to be conducted; determine the
content of job cl assifications; take all necessary actions to carry out
its mission in emergencies; and exercise complete control and discretion
over its organization and the technology of performing its work;
provided, however, that the exercise of such District rights shall not
conflict with the express provisions of this chapter or applicable laws.
1. The rights, powers and authority of the Board of Directors
of the District in all matters, including the right to maintain any legal
action, shall not be modified or restricted by this chapter.
2. The provisions of this Chapter are not intended to conflict
with the provisions of Chapter 10, Division 4, Title 1 of the Government
Code of the State (Sections 3500 et seq.), as amended.
C. Nothing in this section shall be construed to give employees the
right to strike.
2-1-
1. Any employee who encourages~ causes or participates in any
strike~ walkout~ stoppage~ slowdown or impeding of work~ or any other
concerted interference with the conduct of the Di strict's operati ons~
shall be subj ect to immedi ate di scharge or other di sci pl i ne at the sol e
discretion of the District. However~ nothing in this section precludes
the employee from exercising any rights of judicial review.
2. Nothing in this section shall be construed to give the
District the right to lock out employees. The term "lockout" does not
apply to reductions in force~ reorganizations~ change in staffing
requirements~ individual or group disciplinary action(s). Nor shall the
term "lockout" apply to the curtailing of operations by conditions caused
beyond the control of the District.
3. The provisions of this section shall not be deemed to
preclude or to be a condition precedent to the obtaining of any and all
forms of equitabl e and 1 egal relief by the District in the event of such
concerted action.
D. With the excepti on of those meeti ngs referenced in Secti on
4.24.090~ certified employee organization representation unit shall hold
no more than two meetings per year during normal working hours of the
District. Meetings referenced in this section shall only take place at
the end of the workday~ that i s~ Four p. m. If the meeti ng is to be hel d
on District prernises~ they then must comply with the schedul ing
requi rernents of the area in whi ch they propose to have thei r meeti ng.
E. Certified employee organization(s) and representative unites)
shall be allowed to use designated portions of bulletin boards in public
portions of District buildings provided that the information displayed is
within the scope of representation~ and that the responsible party
appropriately posts and removes the information.
F. Representative(s) of a certified employee organizati on (s) or
representative unit(s} shall be allowed reasonable access to work
1 ocati ons to di scuss empl oyee-rel ated matters. The representative~ upon
checking in~ shall be provided the opportunity to meet with the
represented ernpl oyee(s) with i n a reasonabl e time. The representative
shall comply with all safety rules and regulations in effect at that work
1 ocati on.
z--3
G. Representative(s) of a certified anployee organization(s) or
representation unites) shall be permitted to place a supply of literature
at specific locations in District buildings if arranged in advance with
the .d~~~.~.~~~e d8p.~~me~~ Deputy General Manager. (Ord. 150
(part), 1982: prior code S4-712)
Chapter 4.28
SEXUAL HPRASSPENT
Secti ons:
4.28.010
4.28.020
4.28.030
Proh i bi ted.
Retaliation prohibited.
Report and i nvesti gati on.
4.28.010 Prohibited. It is against the District's policy for any
amployee or other person to subj ect another anployee or other person to
sexual harassment. Acts of sexual harassment, which are prohibited by
this pol icy, incl ude but are not 1 imited to: unwelcome sexual activity
of another employee; and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual
nature (e.g. lewd comments or gestures; unwanted intentional physical
contact of a sexual nature; the di spl ay in the workpl ace of sexual 1 y
suggestive objects or pictures) when:
A. Submission to such conduct is made either expl icitly or
implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment;
B. Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is
used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual;
C. Such conduct is offered in order to receive special treatment or
in exchange for or in consideration of any personnel action;
D. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of
interfering with an individual's work performance or
intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
(pa rt), 1984)
unreasonabl y
creating an
(Res. 84-023
2'1
G. Representative(s) of a certified employee organization(s) or
representation unites) shall be permitted to place a supply of literature
at specific locations in District bu1ldings if arranged in advance with
the admjQjs~a~~ depa~tmeQt Deputy General Manager. (Ord. 150
(part), 1982: prior code ~4-712)
Chapter 4.28
SEXU,Al HJlRASSfvENT
Sections:
4.28.010
4.28.020
4.28.030
Proh i bi ted.
Retaliation prohibited.
Report and investigation.
4.28.010 Prohibited. It is against the District's policy for any
employee or other person to subj ect another employee or other person to
sexual harassment. Acts of sexual harassment, which are prohibited by
this policy, include but are not limited to: unwelcome sexual activity
of another employee; and other verbal or physi cal conduct of a sexual
nature (e.g. lewd comments or gestures; unwanted intentional physical
contact of a sexual nature; the displ ay in the workpl ace of sexually
suggestive objects or pictures) when:
A. Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or
implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment;
B. Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is
used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual;
C. Such conduct is offered in order to receive special treatment or
in exchange for or in consideration of any personnel action;
D. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably
interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an
intimidating, host1le, or offensive working environment. (Res. 84-023
(part), 1984)
7-'
4.28.020 Retaliation prohibited. Retaliation against any employee
for refus i ng a sexual advance, for refus i ng a req uest, demand, or subtl e
pressure for sexual favors or activity, or for reporti ng an incident of
possible sexual harassment to the District is also prohibited. (Res.
84-023 (part), 1984)
4.28.030 Report and investigation. If anyone engages in such
conduct, that offending person should be told immediately and firmly by
the anployee that the conduct is considered offensive. Any conti nued
acts of sexual harassment should be immediately reported to a supervisor,
department manager, or personnel officer. After i nvesti gati on,
appropriate disciplinary and/or corrective action will be instituted
against anyone found to have violated this policy. (Res. 84-023 (part),
1984 )
2#
.
Centra... Contra Costa Sanltar) District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 54
POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETlM~~F 4, 1989
SUBJECT
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED
REVISIONS TO TITLE 6 OF THE DISTRICT CODE AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A REVISED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FEE SYSTEM AND ESTABLISH A SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FEES
NO.
III. HEARINGS 2
DATE
May 2, 1989
TYPE OF ACTION
CONDUCT PUBLIC
HEARING/ADOPT
ORDINANCE
SUBAAITTED ay .
Jarrea Miyamoto-Mllls
Senior Engineer
INITIAIINGiDEPT.lOIV. D t t/
cng neerlng epar men
Planning Division
ISSUE: A revised system of Capital Improvement Fees is recommended for adoption
by the Board of Di rectors. A revi si on of the Di stri ct Code and the setti ng of a
schedule of rates by ordinance are required to establish the new system.
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. These projects are needed both for
upgrade/replacement and for expansion of District facilities to serve future
users. The CIP provides the basis for project prioritizing and schedul ing,
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 assumptions in the fee system analysis.
The recently completed fee system analysis concluded that approximately two-thirds
of the additional flow projected for future connectors will be from residential
development and that one-third of the additional flow will be from non-residential
user groups such as reta il stores, offi ces, restaurants, bakeri es, i ndustri es,
schools, and government facilities. In addition, the analysis determined that the
current fee system will not generate adequate funding for future expansion of
District facilities and repayment of the current deficit ($12,164,000 as of
6/30/88) in the portion of the Sewer Construction Fund allocable to past expansion
of facil ities to serve these future connectors. Staff has recommended that a new
fee system be established to provide the needed funds over the period remaining to
"build out" of the District's service area. The proposed fee system would result
in substantial increases in the Capital Improvement Fees appl icable to several
user groups.
To facilitate Board and public review of the proposed fee system, the proposal was
presented in two parts. The fi rst part addressed the proposal for resi denti al
development; the second part addressed the proposal for non-residential user
groups. A comprehensive publ ic participation program was conducted to notify
those that would be impacted by the new fees. This program included direct
mail ing of over 700 informational brochures to residential development interests
and over 500 similar brochures to non-residential developers. In addition to the
direct mailing effort, notices were included in the March newsletters of the East
Bay Chapter of the AlA (American Institute of Architects) and the AGC (Association
of General Contractors). Four public workshops were held to provide an informal
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
~ G7: ENG.
ROGER J. DOLAN
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
~"~
13021\..9/85
SUBJECT
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED
REVISIONS TO TITLE 6 OF THE DISTRICT CODE AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A REVISED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FEE SYSTEM AND ESTABLISH A SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FEES
POSITION PAPER
PAGE
DATE
2
OF
54
May 2, 1989
setti ng for publ fc di scussi on of the fee proposal. Formal publ ic heari ngs before
the Board were hel d for each part of the fee proposal; the fi rst on March 16,
1989, for residential development and the second on April 6, 1989, for
non-residential development. A summary of comments received during the publ fc
workshops through written correspondence and in telephone inquiries is presented
in Attachment 1.
During the public hearing on April 6, 1989, the Board directed staff to develop a
modified proposal which would provide for phased implementation of the revised fee
system over a two-year peri od to mitigate the near-term fi nanci al impacts of the
new fees on the development community. Several alternatives for such a system
were eval uated by staff. A Capital Projects Committee meeti ng was hel d on
April 17, 1989, to review these alternatives. A recommended program for a
two-year phased implementation commencing July 1, 1989, has been developed which
incorporates the following components:
Connectfons durfng First Year <7/1189 'to 6/30/90)
o Project Approval by 6/30/89
Residential:
Current fee system if connected by 12/31/89
Facilities Capacity Fee = $1,760
Pumped Zone Fee = $250 ff connected between 1/1/90
and 6/30/90
Non-Residential:
Current fee system plus 15 percent
o Project Approval after 6/30/89
Non-Residential:
Facilities Capacity Fee = $1,760
Pumped Zone Fee = $250
At midpoint between initial (current fee system plus
15 percent) and fully implemented rates; that is, 50
percent of increase
Residential:
Connectfons after Ffrst Year
o Project Approval by 6/30/90 and Connection by 6/30/91
Residential:
Facilities Capacity Fee = $1,760
Pumped Zone Fee = $250
Non-Residential:
At midpoint between initial (current fee system plus
15 percent) and fully implemented rates; that is, 50
percent of increase
13028-9/85
SUBJECT
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED
REVISIONS TO TITLE 6 OF THE DISTRICT CODE AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A REVISED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FEE SYSTEM AND ESTABLISH A SOiEDULE OF CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FEES
POSITION PAPER
PAGE
DATE
3
OF
54
Mnv'2 lqRq
o Project Approval after 6/30/90
Residential:
Facilities Capacity Fee = $1,870
Pumped Zone Fee = $265
Non-Residential:
New fee system fully impl emented
(100 percent of increase)
Fees for both residential and non-residential development approved after June 30,
1990, include an approximate 6 percent increase to account for projected inflation
in project costs (4 percent) and to provide for recovery of the revenue not
collected due to phased implementation of the fee system (2 percent).
An ordinance which would establish the proposed system of Capital Improvement Fees
by revising Title 6 of the District Code and would establish a schedule of Capital
Improvement Fee rates consisting of three rate tables, one for each period of the
phased implementation has been prepared. A copy of this ordinance is presented as
Attachment 2. The ordinance includes the following recommended findings:
o The purpose of the revi si ons to the Capital Improvement Fee system for both
residential and non-residential development is to finance the capital
facilities needed to accommodate new development within the District's
existing service area.
o Projected development will generate an added burden on the wastewater
collection, treatment, and disposal system which would cause degradation in
the quality of service provided by the District below that which is
permissible. Capital improvements for expansion of facilities will be
required to maintain an adequate level of service.
o The cost basis for the Facil ities Capacity Fees is the CIP. Cost estimates
set forth in the CIP are reasonable.
o There is a strong and reasonable relationship between the Facilities Capacity
Fees to be charged each future user and the cost of providing facilities
capacity for each such user.
o The proposed Facilities Capacity Fees are exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
It is appropriate to receive additional public comments in a formal public hearing
prior to the Board's considering the ordinance for adoption. May 4, 1989, was
established as the date for this public hearing, and appropriate notices have been
publ ished and posted. In addition, the text of the proposed revisions to the
District Code have been on file in the office of the Secretary of the District for
15 days, as required.
13026-9/85
SUBJECT
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED
REVISIONS TO TITLE 6 OF THE DISTRICT CX>DE AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A REVISED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FEE SYSTEM AND ESTABLISH A SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FEES
POSITION PAPER
PAGE
DATE
4
OF 54
May 2, 1989
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a publ ic hearing to receive comments on the proposed
revisions to the Capital Improvement Fee System. Adopt the recommended ordinance
to establish the new fee system.
13026-9/85
ORDINANCE NO. 169
SUGGESTED REVISIONS TO PROPOSED
CODE SECTION 6.12.030 SUBPARAGRAPH K
K. Effective date of chapter. Thi s chapter shall become effective on
July 1, 1989. However, the Board finds that the implementation of a fee
structure as provided by the terms of this chapter will cause substantial
fee increases for certain ~ connectors and those imposinQ an added
burden on District facilities. The fee structure set forth in this
chapter may therefore be impl emented with phased increases as may be
provided for in fee tables adopted by the Board. This phased
implementation is intended to mitigate the potential financial impact on
new connectors and those imposinQ an added burden on District facilities
over the first two (2) years of the Facilities Capacity Fee's
implementation. The fee tables may use the pre-existing fee structure to
provi de for percentage increases over pre-exi sti ng fees and/or mi nimum
fees in order to effect the phase in.
For purposes of determining whether the fees as calculated under the fee
table based on pre-existing ordinances or the fee as calculated pursuant
to the fee tables established under the terms of this chapter shall
apply, it is determined that the fees set forth in the fee table based on
pre-existing ordinances shall be applied to all new connections or added
burdens for which the building permit has been issued by the appropriate
jurisdictional authority, or the District has affixed its stamp approving
construction on the pertinent building plans, or in the case of a new
subdivision, the District has approved the developer-installed sewer
system to serve the subdivision, before July 1, 1989, provided that the
new connecti on or added burden occurs and the appropri ate fee is pai d
before January 1, 1990, in the case of residential development and before
July 1, 1990, in the case of non-residential development. With regard to
changes of use, or the adding of burdens for which no building permit is
issued for any reason, all such changes of use and/or initiation of uses
adding a burden which occur on or after July 1, 1989, shall pay fees
based on the provisions of this chapter.
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
TO: County Cl erk
County of Contra Costa
725 Court Street
Martinez, California 94553
FROM: Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff P1 ace
Martinez, CA 94553
Project Title
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM REVISIONS
Project Location-Specific Project Location-County
DISTRICT-WIDE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project
THIS FEE FINANCES C'\PITAL PROJECTS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN SERVICE WITHIN THE
EXISTING SERVICE AREA
Name of Public Agency Approving Project
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
Exempt Status: STATUTORY EXEMPTION - SECTION 15273. RATES, TOLLS, FARES, AND
CHARGES
Reasons why project is exempt:
The Board of Di rectors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary Di stri ct fi nds that
the adoption of the proposed Facility Capacity Fees will provide for capital
projects necessary to maintain service within the existing service area. The
funds generated are to be used, in part, for repayment of a portion of the capital
costs of facilities constructed in the past which incl uded capacity for future
users, such as the San Ramon Valley Trunk Sewer and the Stage 5B Treatment Plant
Expansion Project. All past projects have completed the CEQA process.
The Board finds that the change in fee structure will not, in itself, result in an
expansion of facilities to provide for growth outside the ~xisting service area.
The adoption of these fees will not result in any specific.project nor result in a
direct physical change in the environment.
The Board finds that the District either has or will produce Negative
Declarations, Environmental Impact Reports, or other CEQA compliance documentation
pri or to the constructi on of any capital improvement proj ect pl anned for in the
District's Capital Improvement Plan. The Board finds that the proposed capital
improvement fee system provides a rational basis for relating the fees charged
each new customer with the cost of providing facilities capacity for each new
customer.
Contact Person
RUSSELL LEAVITT
Area Code
415
Telephone
689-3890
Extension
255
ATTACHMENT 1
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
May 1, 1989
TO: JARRED MIYAK>TO-MILLS
FROM: J ACQ.UEL INE L. ZAYAC cf-~
SUBJECT: PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROPOSED FACILITIES CAPACITY FEE
I have prepared this memorandum so that the Board of Directors can be
informed about all the public comments received on the proposed
Facil iti es Capacity Fee. I have not i ncl uded a summary of the comments
made at public hearings conducted by the Board.
Residential Facilities Capacity Fee
I received seven telephone call s about the proposed Resi denti al
Facilities Capacity Fee. The calls can be summarized as follows:
3 - Why doesn't the fee differentiate between single family
residences and multiple family residences? <Developers)
2 - When will the proposed fee become effective? (Developers)
1 - What is the difference between our current fee and the proposed
fee? (City of Martinez)
1 - Will the new fee affect the cost of converting from septic tank
to sewer service?
7
A total of nine people attended the March 8 and March 9, 1989, public
workshops on the proposed residential fee. They represented the
following groups:
Building Industry Association 2
Allied Investments 1
Blackhawk 1
City of Martinez 1
Presley of Northern California 1
Prometheus 1
Vermillion Group 1
Warmington Homes 1
9
The following is a summary of the types of questions that were asked.
o Will annexation fees be affected?
,
Jarred Miyamoto-Mills
Page 2
May 1, 1989
o Will Concord be affected?
o Will a separate account be set up for expansion fees?
o Will the proposed fee be affected by changes in wastewater discharge
standards?
o What major projects are planned in the next ten years?
o When will the treatment plant need to be expanded?
o What is a prudent reserve?
o Is it equitable to charge the same fee for all single-family homes?
o Smaller residential users will bear more of the burden of cost if a
differentiation in fees is not made among different types of
residential users.
o How much longer can new homeowners conti nue to afford the cost of
new infrastructure before growth is stopped?
o Will there be future fee increases?
o When will the new fee become effective?
I al so received three letters regarding the proposed fee. The first
letter was from the Building Industry Association and it supported the
fee increase. The second 1 etter was from the Park Pl ace Group and it
requested that the fee only be increased by 25 percent. I have attached
a copy of both letters and their replies. The third letter was from UDC
Homes and it stated that UDC Homes's development is exempt from the fee.
A copy of this letter is also attached.
Non-Residential Facilities Capacity Fee
I received 13 telephone call s about the proposed Non-Resi denti al
Facilities Capacity Fee. The calls can be summarized as follows:
1 - The proposed fee will stop restaurant construction in our
service area.
4 - Will the new fee apply to existing users?
2 - When will the proposed fee become effective?
2 - May the fees be prepaid to take advantage of the current fees?
1 - Will a special assessment appear on the tax bill?
2 - What impact will the fee have on supermarkets?
1 - Implement the new fee in phases.
13
Jarred Miyamoto-Mills
Page 3
May 1, 1989
A total of five people attended the March 23 and 28, 1989, public
workshops on the proposed non-resi denti al fee. They represented the
following groups:
Medical Building Developer 1
Burger King Franchisee 1
City of Walnut Creek 1
Golden Rain Foundation 1
Safeway Stores 1
5
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?
JLZ:bc
Attachments
cc: Joyce McMillan with attachments
THE PARK PLACE GROUP
A limited Partnership
March 7, 1989
Jacqueline L. Zayac
Community Relations Coordinator
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA- 94553
Dear Jacqueline:
We are in receipt of your February. 24, 1989 letter outlining
proposed increases in the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District's
Facilities Capacity fee structure. I am writing to protest the
increase in the sewer fee charges.
On a typical apartment project, the proposed increase is
essentially doubling the fee per unit in Zone 1 and adding another
25 percent increase if a project is located in Zone 2.
There are many "roadblocks" in constructing new housing in this
area. High land costs, construction costs, as well as heavy fees
imposed by cities and utility districts make constructing new
housing extremely difficult. As we all well know, affordable
housing is an extremely important issue, so the question becomes
one of balancing the costs of providing new housing and the
services of this new housing. While I recognize that an increase
in fee structure may be necessary, to double the fee is
outlandish. I would suggest increasing the fee by 25 percent.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
si~cer7 '
~~~
Vice President
BSK:mv
31 ~ I {? ~ C c.. '. ~ L.
2960 Camino Diablo, Suite 300, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 · (415) 932-6606 · FAX: (415) 937-5029
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019/mhoff Place Martinez. California 945534392 (415) 689-3890 FAX: (415) 676-7211
March 31, 1989
ItOGEIt I. OOtA,.
G<n~rtll Af.n.,<',
C"'~I En,ln<<,
lAMes L HAZAIfO
Counsc'/ol' ,It~ DInner
(./S/9J.-14JO
IO"CC E. ~fC ~"L(A'.
S<<r~'.ry of ''''' OI..rio-
Mr. Bradley S. Korinke
Vice President
The Park Place Group
2960 Camino Diablo, Suite 300
Wa 1 nut Creek, CA 94596
Dear Mr. Korinke:
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAl FACILITIES CAPACITY FEE
Thank you for your letter regarding the proposed Residential Facl1 ities
Capacity - Fee. A copy of your letter will be given to each Di rector of
the District prior to the April 20, 1989, Board of Directors' meeting.
On April 20, 1989, the Board of-Directors will vote on the implementation
of the proposed fee revision for residential and non-residential
deivelopment. Di strict staff is recommendi ng that the Board approve the
fee proposal outl iood in the brochure you received.
In your letter, you suggested that the fee be increased by 25 percent.
Di strict staff's analysi s found that a 25-percent increase woul d not
collect enough money to pay for the collection system and treatment plant
expansions which will be required to serve new development. The fees
being proposed by District staff ensure that the money will be available
to bul1d projects to increase capacity at District facil ities when they -
are needed.
Since you were unable to attend the publ ic workshops scheduled on the
proposed Residential Facilities Capacity Fee, Di strict staff woul d be
happy to meet with you at your convenience to discuss the proposed fees.
Please feel free to telephone me to schedule an appointment time.
Sincerely,
~ Xltr-
Jacqueline l. Zayac
Community Rel~tions Coordinator
JlZ: be
..1.~\\.N CA.l/~
~'\~ O.p.."
~O ~
B I R
BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
EASTERN DIVISION
BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
1280 BOULEVARD WAY #211, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94595
(415) 932-8884 (415) 444-8711
cc
J '(;) {-,-}
.'" /. >c..../ LJ
'\' i
April 10, 1989
Ii, /]/
ArEClEDYl!1t)
APR 11 ,geS
Susan McNulty Rainey
President
Central Contra Costa
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553
,( n\l/\ \
tl,{. L,')' , (~ill c-qU\ct l,--, '
. J t; It'
Sanitary District
cccaD , .
!"~AF.TAAYOI1HF t'I~rt,,,,,,
RE: Capital Improvement Fee for Residential Development
Dear President McNulty-Rainey and Members of the Board:
As you are aware, the Building Industry Association (BIA) , Eastern
Division represents over 750 members which include the major resi-
dential and commercial builders as well as the associated sub-con-
tractors, engineers, financial institution, architects, etc. which
deal with the home building industry. We represent a large cross
section of the community, including the unknown numbers of people
we build homes and offices of the future for.
The District's pay-as-you-go financing program, designed to equally
distribute costs to the users, must also ensure that adequate fund-
ing is available for expansion of current facilities to meet the
projected demand to serve new users.
Because the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District has done the
planning necessary to meet both existing and future users needs,
and has presented the BIA with a comprehensive program detailing
all the projected capital improvement projects, we find the proposed
fee revision reasonable and fair, even though the ultimate cost will
be borne by the future homeowners, and create more impact on our
current housing affordability crisis.
We would also like to take this opportunity to recognize the out-
standing effort the staff took in gaining our input early in the
process, and we commend their hard work and professionalism.
The BIA sincerely hopes that another
ourselves facing another increase in
je{ truly YGJ~
t-1?l!~ '~ri'J\ cb~
And w C. Johnso
Executive Director
HEADQUARTERS
(415) 820-7626
San Ramon
10 years pass before we find
the District's fees.
REGIONAL OFFICES:
WEST SAY
(415) 364-9008
Redwood City
SOUTHERN
(408) 243-5889
Santa Clara
NORTHERN
(707) 584-9133
Rohnert Park
AFFILIATED WITH NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDERS AND CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
,. ." .. -[,I r.t. r.t .. .., . "
" " 4 .. .. . . ..
ROGER I. DOLAN
C;~n~rQI Manager
CII/"f En,/n"",
lAMES L HIlZARD
Coun..,1 fa' tll" District
(4t S) 933- t "30
IOYCE E_ McMtLLAN
s<<,"tQry of tll" District
May 1, 1989
Mr. Andrew C. Johnson
Executive Director
Building Industry Association -
Eastern Division
1280 Boul evard Way 1211
Walnut Creek, CA 94595
Dear Mr. Johnson:
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES CAPACITY FEE
Thank you for your letter of April 10, 1989, regardi ng the proposed
capital improvement fee increase for resi denti al development. The
District appreciates the building industry's support of our capital
improvement program.
The District intends to remain a pay-as-you-go agency and will review the
Facilities Capacity Fee on a yearly basis. Two factors that the District
expects to be relevant are: (1) any new regulations imposed by the
agencies governing the District which require additional capital
facilities and (2) cost increases that are warranted.
The District hopes that by allowing justifiable incremental increases to
the Facilities Capacity Fee, a major fee increase such as that being
proposed this year will not need to be proposed again.
Sincerely,
(jdJtlev c{ 3~/~
Parke L. Boneysteele ~~
President Pro Tern
Board of Directors
JZ:bc
be: Joyce McMi 11 an /
iUDC}
/ 1717 &ssmoor Parkway
P.O. Box 2220
Walnut Creek, California 94595
(415) 932-3900
lJDe Homes
Limited Partnership
BAND DELIVERED
April 21, 1989
ij, re~1"">-~'i""
'" J...u. '".7'\
..... u... ~ i.bt
Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa County
Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553
APR 21 1989
CCCSD
~"~nitr:nY 0; THe ~'~--'-'"
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am writing on behalf of UDC Homes regarding the proposed Facilities
Capacity Fee now being considered by the District. Based on information
we have received, we understand that the District's intent is to impose
this fee across the board to new connections within the District, including
new connections in Rossmoor. You should be advised of the existence
of contractual obligations made by the District which exempt Rossmoor
from this increased fee, and in the course of your consideration of the
Facilities Capacity Fee we believe it would be prudent for the Board
to write in an appropriate exception for Rossmoor.
Because you may not be familiar with the history of these special
contractual obligations, I will review then briefly here. In 1963 Rossmoor
Corporation, the predecessor to UDC Homes, and the District signed an
agreement providing for the annexation of the Dollar Ranch into the
District. The agreement, which your counsel probably has already made
available to you, by its express terms covers the entire development
of Dollar Ranch, which of course is now called Rossmoor. The agreement
establishes all fees for connecting Rossmoor's dwelling units to the
District's sewage system based on a formula using the standard connection
charge at the time and the occupancy ratio for Rossmoor.
The agreement provides that these rates are to apply throughout the entire
development of Rossmoor, which is specifically identified in the agreement
by an attached map. In 1965, the District and Rossmoor Corporation entered
into a "Supplemental Agreement Establishing the Time at which Connection
Rates Shall be Determined" in order to clarify the intention of the parties
under the 1963 agreement. The clarification was that the connection
charges would be based on the District's rate schedule in effect at the
time of execution of the 1963 agreement (Le., September 5, 1963), and
that "any changes in said rate schedule subsequent to that time shall
have no effect on the amount of the connection charges made pursuant
to the agreement of September 5, 1963."
Listed on the New York Stock E%chaT/.lle
Letter to Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa County
Sanitary District
April 19, 1989
Page -2-
The 1963 agreement remains in full force and effect, and will continue
to apply throughout the full development of Rossmoor. We appreciate
that there is a difference of view between the District and UDC Homes
regarding the continued application of the 1963 agreement and that attempts
have been made in the past to resolve those differences, unfortunately
without success. Although we remain willing to discuss a solution to
the dispute, the magnitude of the increase in connection fees represented
by the proposed Facilities Capacity Fee has prompted us to consider
alternative means to protect our contractual rights if the District intends
to seek to impose a Facilities Capacity Fee on Rossmoor. We believe
the Board of Directors of the District, in the discharge of its public
duties, must take note of UDC Homes' rights under the 1963 agreement
and its position that the Facilities Capacity Fee, if enacted, will not
supersede the District's contractual obligations under the 1963 agreement.
Indeed, we believe it is necessary now to give you notice that UDC Homes
will insist upon its rights under the 1963 agreement. Unless appropriate
exclusions are made in the proposed Facilities Capacity Fee recognizing
and honoring the 1963 agreement, it is our position that the District
in effect will be denying its contractual obligations.
. Comegys
ident
copies mailed to:
Kenton L. AIm, Esq.
Sellar, Hazard, Snyder, Kelly & Fitzgerald
1111 Civic Drive, Suite 300
Post Office Box 3510
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
Chris R. Ottenweller, Esq.
Brown & Bain
600 Hansen Way,
Palo Alto, CA 94306
ATTACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA
SANITARY DISTRICT AMENDING AND ADDING
PROVISIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 6.12 OF DISTRICT CODE
AND ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULES FOR
FACILITIES CAPACITY FEE
WHEREAS, substantial study has been conducted regarding
the impacts of contemplated future development on this
District's existing services and facilities, along with an
analysis of new, improved or expanded District facilities
required or appropriate to serve new development within the
District's service area, and said studies have set forth the
relationship between new development, those facilities and the
estimated costs of those capital improvements; and whereas
these studies were undertaken by District staff and culminated
in several documents that are part of the public record, to
wit: the "1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan" the Capital
Improvement Fee System Analysis" dated January 5, 1989; the
"Capital Improvement Fee Proposal to Nonresidential Uses",
dated February 9, 1989; the "Capital Improvement Fee System
Revision for Residential Uses", dated February, 1989; and the
"Capital Fee System Revision for Non-Residential Uses", dated
March, 1989;
WHEREAS, materials noted above were available for public
inspection and review prior to the public hearing held on May
4, 1989, and proper notice with regard to said public hearing
was given; and
May 2, 1989
Page 2
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held on
March 16, 1989, to receive comments on the draft 1989 capital
Improvement Plan and to consider the proposed capi tal
improvement fees for residential development, with proper
notice of the availability of information documenting the basis
for the proposed fees having been made prior thereto; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held on
April 6, 1989, to receive comments on the proposed capital
improvement fee system for nonresidential development, with
proper notice of the availabili ty of information documenting
the basis for the proposed fees having been made prior thereto;
and
WHEREAS, additional pUblic workshop sessions were properly
noticed and held on March 8 and March 9, 1989, with regard to
the proposed capital improvement fee system for residential
development; and
WHEREAS, additional public workshop sessions were properly
noticed and held on March 23 and March 28, 1989, with the
proposed capital improvement fee system for nonresidential
development; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 6.12 of the District Code requires
amendment in order to provide enabling authority for the
District to enact the proposed revision to the capital
improvement fee system and to enact Facilities Capacity Fees
for both residential and non-residential development; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds as follows:
J.~ay ~, .L989
Page 3
A. The purpose of the revisions to the capital
improvement fee system for both residential and non-residential
development is to finance capital facilities to accommodate the
added burden placed on the District's wastewater collection,
treatment
and disposal
system directly
and
indirectly
attributed to new development within the District's service
area.
B. The "revenues" collected pursuant to this Ordinance
shall be used to finance the District facilities required to
provide service to new development and to accommodate the added
burden placed on the District facilities occasioned by new
development, which facilities are generally set forth as
facilities for "expansion" in the 1989 Ten-Year Capital
Improvement Plan (including such revisions to such 1989
Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan as may be approved in the
future by the District Board).
C. After considering the studies and analyses prepared by
the staff as presented within the various public hearings and
the documents set forth above, and the testimony received from
District staff and the public at the public hearings, the Board
approves the Capi tal Improvement Plan and the Capi tal
Improvement Fee System analysis studies and incorporates such
herein; and, further, finds that new development within the
District service area
generates an added burden on the
District wastewater collection, treatment and disposal system
and would contribute to the degradation of the overall
May 2, 1989
Page 4
wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to be
provided wi thin the District, absent expendi ture for capi tal
improvements for additional capacity for new development as
outlined within the documents set forth above.
D. It is necessary within the District service area to
provide for improvements and/or new facilities which have not
yet been constructed, or have been constructed, but for which
new development has not yet contributed its fair share towards
the facility costs of said facilities.
This necessity to
provide for improvements and new facilities is required to
maintain an adequate level of service within the District
service area.
E. The facts and evidence presented establish that there
is a strong and reasonable relationship between the need for
the improvements and/or new District facilities and the types
of development as set forth wi th some particulari ty in the
Schedules of Facilities Capacity Fees (set forth as Exhibit "B"
to this Ordinance), for which the corresponding fee is charged,
and there is a strong and reasonable relationship between the
fees' intended use and the type of development for which the
fee is charged, and that reasonable relationship is described
in more detail in the study documents referred to above.
F. The revenues generated by the Facilities Capacity Fees
collected pursuant to this Ordinance are to be used, in part,
for repaYment of a portion of the capital costs of facil i ties
constructed in the past which have provided capacity for future
J.vii::1Y ~, .i.~~~
Page 5
users, such as these San Ramon Valley Trunk Sewer and the Stage
SB Treatment Plant Expansion proj ect.
All such past projects
providing capacity for future users complied with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
procedures.
G. The change in the fee structure occasioned by the
adoption of this Ordinance creating the Facilities capacity Fee
system will not, in itself, result in an expansion of
facilities to provide growth outside of the existing service
area. The adoption of this Facilities Capacity Fee system will
not result in any specific project nor result in any direct
physical change in the environment.
An Environmental Impact
Report, or other appropriate CEQA compliance documentation,
will be prepared prior to the undertaking of any "project",
which proj ect is to be funded in whole or in part by the
revenues collected pursuant to the Facilities capacity Fee
system contained herein.
H. The Board has complied with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act with regard to enacting
this Ordinance in that Notice of Exemption has been prepared,
the findings therein are hereby adopted, and such exemption
will be filed pursuant to law.
I. The cost estimates set forth in the 1989 Capital
Improvement Plan are reasonable cost estimates for constructing
the needed facilities to accommodate the added burden to be
imposed by new development generally, that the estimates were
May :l, .l9d9
Page 6
intentionally fixed to be reasonable costs anticipated as of
this date which therefore may be subject to some escalation,
and that the fees expected to be generated from the Facilities
Capacity Fee system will not exceed the total of all actual
costs reasonably allocable to expansion of District facilities
to serve new development.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Central
Contra Costa Sanitary District does ordain as follows:
section 1.
Chapter 6.12 of the District Code shall be amended
and such provisions shall be added as are set forth
in full in Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance.
section 2.
A Facilities Capacity Fee shall be charged in
accordance with the amended provisions of Chapter 6.12 of
the District Code as set forth in Exhibit "A" to this
Ordinance, and said fees shall be at such rates for such
categories of users, dependent on the type of new
development which is proposed, as is set forth in the
Schedule of Facilities Capacity Fees, Tables 1, 2 and 3,
as set forth in full in Exhibit "B" to this Ordinance,
which is hereby incorporated in full herein by reference.
Section 3.
This Ordinance shall be a general regulation of the
District and shall be published. once in the Contra Costa
"'.LCl} ~, ,.::;I(S::;#
Page 7
Times, a newspaper of general circulation, published and
circulated within the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District, and shall be effected as of July 1, 1989,
pursuant to the terms of enactment and repeal as set forth
more fully in Chapter 6.12 of the District Code, as
amended and set forth in Exhibit "A".
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District on the 4th day of May,
1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
President of the Board of Directors,
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa,
State of California
Secretary, Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of
Contra Costa, State of California
APPROVED as to Form:
District Counsel
Sections:
6.12.010
6.12.020
6.12.030
6.12.040
6.12.050
6.12.060
6.12.070
6.12.080
EXHIBIT "A"
Cha-pter 6.12
FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
-J..--- --, ....JuJ
Findings
Adoption by Ordinance
General Provisions
Residential Facilities Capacity Fees
Nonresidential Facilities Capacity Fees
Change of Use
Credits
Repeal of Prior Fees
6.12.010 Findinqs
The Board of Directors finds the current balances in the
sewer construction fund and the present connection fee system are
inadequate to meet immediate and long-term future capital
expansion needs of the District. The Board of Directors finds
that the existing District customers have made a substantial
investment in the existing District collection system and
treatment plant facilities that will benefit new connectors to the
District system. The Board also finds that it is appropriate that
new connectors to the system provide the revenue needed for the
District to provide the additional capacity within the collection
system and treatment facilities which is necessitated by the added
burden placed on the system due to new connectors. Based on an
accounting of the sources of funds which have contributed to the
current Sewer Construction Fund balance' and the historic use of
revenues from that fund, the Board finds that all funds currently
wi thin the sewer construction fund should be allocated to future
upgrade and replacement costs and the full cost of all prospective
capi tal improvements for expansion should be funded through the
collection of a Facilities Capacity Fee. The Board further finds
that the accounting of the Sewer Construction Fund balance and the
historic use of revenues from that fund demonstrates that a
$12,164,000 deficit existed on June 30, 1988 with regard to the
portion of the Fund balance which should be allocated toward
capital improvements for expansion.
Based on these findings the Board of Directors adopts the
Facilities Capacity Fee system set forth in the provisions of this
Chapter in order to insure adequate funding of all capital
facilities expansions occasioned by the added burden on the system
attributable to new users; to maintain the District's
pay-as-you-go financing system; to provide that each future
connector to the District pay its fair share of the cost of
expansion of the District's facilities; to provide for a prudent
reserve; and, to simplify the administration and collection of
fees. It is the intent of this Chapter that the Facilities
Capacity Fees system shall provide revenue sufficient to meet the
capi tal cost requirements of providing capacity throughout the
effective period of the current and successive capital improvement
plans. It is the further intent of this Chapter that the factors
to be considered in calculating the future capital costs and
projecting needed revenues shall include, but not be limited to,
growth projections, the current costs of facility construction,
current Fund balance or deficit, proj~cted increased costs of
(2)
-
.
facility construction, the differential cost in providing service
between various areas of the District, current and anticipated
change in governmental regulation, inflation and the time value of
money.
6.12.020 Adootion bv Ordinance
The District Board of Directors shall establish Facilities
Capaci ty Fees by ordinance upon a two-thirds vote after a public
hearing.
The Board of Directors shall, pursuant to such
procedure, adopt rates for residential units within each zone.
Additionally, the Board, when establishing nonresidential fees
shall adopt Residential Unit Equivalence (RUE) factors and the
units-of-measure for each user group.
The rates and RUE factors
set forth in the Ordinance shall be based on an engineering
application of the principles set forth in this Chapter. The
nonresidential rates shall be described through the use of a table
of equivalents which sets forth the unit-of-measure and the RUE
factor for each user group and each zone.
6.12.030 General provisions
A. Definitions
1.
Added burden.
Added burden shall mean any of the
following:
(a) A connection from a parcel, direct or indirect,
to the sewer system for the first time, of any
structure.
(b) An existing connection from a parcel where the
estimated volume of flow or the strength of the
(3)
wastewater discharged from said parcel will be
increased due to construction of additional
units-of-measure, or a change in land usage.
This increase in flow or strength shall include
an existing connection from a nonresidential
parcel where the units-of-measure attributable
to said parcel has at any time been increased,
including any combination of increases over time
once said increases are known to the parcel
owner and/or discovered by the District,
whichever comes first. If more than one
independent operation exists on a single parcel,
an added burden shall also mean an existing
connection where the number of Residential Unit
Equivalents attributable to an individual
operation has increased due to a differing use.
If a single and integral operation spans two or
more contiguous parcels, the increase shall be
measured against the total number of Residential
Unit Equivalents attributable to the operation.
2. Chanqe of Use. Any imposition of an added burden on
District facilities which occurs after the initial
connection from the parcel to the District sewage
system for which applicable fees have been paid.
Change in use shall include but not be limited to any
alteration of the use of a parcel which requires that
the parcel be reclassified to a different user group.
Change in use shall ~lso include additions,
(4)
renovations,
modifications,
construction,
reconstruction, or redevelopment of an existing
nonresidential parcel or of structures on such a
parcel which results in a net increase in
units-of-measure even though the user will remain
wi thin the same user group. Change of use shall
include the addition of any new residential unit to an
existing residential parcel.
3. Nonresidential user. A nonresidential user shall
include all users who have a connection or are
connecting to District facilities where the land use
of the parcel is other than for residential units (as
the term is defined within this Code), including, but
not limited to, all commercial, industrial, service
related and governmental uses.
4. Parcel. A parcel shall mean real property upon
which a separate assessor's parcel number has been
established.
S. Person. A person shall mean any individual,
partnership, committee, association, corporation,
foundation, public agency and any other organization
or group of persons, public or private.
6. Residential Unit Fee. A Residential Unit Fee shall
be defined as the Facilities Capacity Fee set by the
Board of Directors for a residential unit within a
zone.
7. Residential Unit Ecrui valence Factor. A Residential
Unit Equivalence (RUE) facto~ shall be defined as the
(5 )
9.
factor used in determining the added burden placed on
the system by nonresidential users and shall be
established based on the equivalency to the burden (in
terms of capacity) that a typical residential unit
places on the District's sewerage system, including
the factors of volume of flow and strength of flow.
8. Residential Unit. A residential unit shall be
defined as the unit-of-measure for the use of any
parcel or portion of a parcel for exclusively
residential purposes which shall include, but not be
limi ted to, single-family dwellings, each unit of a
multiple-family dwelling (such as apartments,
condominiums and townhouses), mobile home residences
and other forms of property use providing for
independent habitation such as in-law or "granny"
units.
Unit-of-measure.
A unit-of-measure shall mean the
basic unit used by the District in quantifying the
degree of use for a particular use of a parcel. Each
prospective user within a particular user group shall
be evaluated with regard to the added burden placed on
the sewerage system based upon a predetermined
unit-of-measure for that user group. Units of measure
may include criteria such as the number of dwelling
units, structure square footage, parcel acreage,
fixture units, seating capacity, number of beds,
and/or number of employees or customers anticipated or
other unit-of-measure found to be appropriate.
(6 )
B. Administration. The General Manager-Chief Engineer shall
administer, implement, and enforce the provisions of this
Chapter. Any powers granted to or duties imposed on the General
Manager-Chief Engineer may be delegated by the General
Manager-Chief Engineer to persons acting in the beneficial
interest of, or in the employ of the District.
C. Use of Fac ili ties Ca-paci ty Fee Revenues. All Facilities
Capacity Fee revenues collected pursuant to this Chapter shall be
placed in the District's Sewer Construction Fund. These revenues
will be accounted for separately. All monies deposited within the
Facilities Capacity Fee account will ultimately be applied to
capital projects for expansions of the District's sewerage system
associated with providing capacity for new users.
D. Time for determination and assessment of fee. The amount
of Facilities Capacity Fees to be assessed due to an added burden
shall be determined at the time of the new connection based on the
then existing or proposed use of the subject property when
connected. If the added burden occurs without a new connection,
then the time for determination of fees will be when the added
burden occurs or when the District approves plans relating to the
change of use, whichever comes first. The fees will be assessed
against the parcel at that time.
E. Time for payment and penalties for delinquent payment.
Payment of the Facilities Capacity Fee shall be due and made prior
to the time of imposition of the added burden as the term is
defined in this Chapter. If a new connection occurs, payment
shall be m.:tde prior to the issuance of the permit to connect to
the public sewer. The Facilities Capacity Fee shall be paid to
(7 )
the District at the District office located at 5019 Imhoff Place,
Martinez, California 94553.
Unpaid charges shall become delinquent forty-five (45) days
after mailing, or giving personal service of, a notice of charges
for an existing connection, or forty-five (45) days after a
connection is made, whichever occurs first. A penalty charge of
10% of the original unpaid amount shall be added to any Facilities
Capaci ty Fee that becomes delinquent. Interest at the maximum
rate provided by law regarding delinquent fees and charges shall
accrue on the total of all delinquent fees plus penalty charges.
With respect to any delinquencies which accrued before the
effective date of this Chapter, or delinquencies which are
subsequently discovered through review of District records, a
penalty shall be imposed and interest shall accrue from July 1,
1989, or forty-five (45) days after mailing of notice of charges
to the user, whichever occurs first.
F. Persons responsible for payment of Facilities Capacity
~. The person(s) responsible for the payment of the Facilities
Capacity Fee, including such fees as may arise out of added burden
due to change of use, shall include the owner of the subject
parcel (at the time the fee becomes due) and/or the sewer
connection permit applicant, if those persons are not one and the
same person or entity. The parcel owner at the the time of
discovery of an unpaid or delinquent Facilities Capacity Fee shall
be responsible for payment of the Fee if the new connection or
added burden occurred without payment of the appropriate fees,
regardless of -,heth~r the connection or added burden occurred
during a time when this person owned the parcel. The liability
(8)
for payment of said fees in the event the fees are not paid when
due by the parcel owner or permit applicant, shall be joint and
several amongst the persons mentioned herein, but such joint and
several liability for a payment shall not limit any party's rights
of contribution or indemnity against other parties. It is the
intent of this Chapter that the parcel owner at the time the added
burden occurs should be ultimately liable as between the persons
jointly responsible for payment of the fee as set forth herein,
absent the existence of legally binding contractual provisions
between the responsible parties to the contrary.
G. Addi tional fee. The revenues provided by assessment and
collection of the Facilities Capacity Fee shall be in addition to
all revenue otherwise collected by the District, including, but
not limited to ad valorem taxes, federal and state grants,
contract revenue, investment income, annexation fees, sewer
service charges, operating and maintenance fees and charges, and
charges imposed under the District's source control Chapter.
H. Cumulative Remedies. The remedies expressed in this
Chapter shall be cumulative with, and in addition to, any and all
other remedies that the District may have in law or equity. The
District shall be entitled to recover its attorney's fees and cost
incurred in enforcing the collection of fees under this Chapter,
in addition to any fees, penalties, interest or other amounts to
which the District may be entitled.
I. Authority to Inspect Premises. In order to effect the
powers of this Chapter and pursuant to Section 6523.2 of the
Heal th and Safety Code of t.le State of California, the General
Manager-Chief Engineer and his autho~ized representatives are
(9)
hereby given the power and authority to enter upon private
property for the purpose of inspection of sanitary and waste
disposal facilities, including, but not limited to, ascertaining
the nature of such premises, the type of activities carried on
therein, the number of plumbing fixtures therein, and any other
facts or information reasonably necessary to ascertain the
applicabili ty of any fees to be assessed against such premises I
including fees for added burden as a result of changed use.
This
power is subject to any constitutional protections provided for at
law. However, failure of a user or prospective user to allow
reasonable access to the District for inspection and as set forth
herein shall be good cause for denying connection to, or
termination of, service from the District's sewerage system.
J.
Severability.
If any section,
subsection,
sentence,
clause, phrase or portion of this Chapter is for any reason held
to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Chapter.
The District
Board hereby declares that it would have adopted this Chapter and
each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion
thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared
invalid or unconstitutional.
K.
Effective date of Chapter.
This Chapter shall become
effective on July 1, 1989.
However I the Board finds that the
implementation of a fee structure as provided by the terms of this
Chapter will
cause
substantial
f~e
increases
for
certain
connectors.
The fee structure set forth in this Chapter may
(10)
therefore be implemented with phased increases as may be provided
for in fee tables adopted by the Board.
This phased
implementation is intended to mitigate the potential financial
impact on new connectors over the first two (2) years of the
Facilities Capacity Fee's implementation.
The fee tables may use
the preexisting fee structure to provide for percentage increases
over preexisting fees and/or minimum fees in order to effect the
phase in.
For purposes of determining whether the fee as calculated under
the fee table based on preexisting ordinances or the fee as
calculated pursuant to the fee tables established under the terms
of this Chapter shall apply, it is determined that the fees set
forth in the fee table based on preexisting ordinances shall be
applied to all new connections or added burdens for which the
building permit has been issued by the appropriate jurisdictional
authority, or the District has affixed its stamp approving
construction on the pertinent building plans, or, in the case of a
new subdivision, the District has approved the construction plans
for the developer installed sewer system to serve the subdivision,
before July 1, 1989, provided that the new connection or added
burden occurs and the appropriate fee is paid before July 1,
1990. With regard to changes of use, or the adding of burdens for
which no building permit is issued for any reason, all such
changes of use and/or initiation of uses adding a burden which
occur on or after July 1, 1989 shall pay fees based on the
provisions of this Chapter.
IR ...,'iiR.; fees PUJ!'8lUlllt te tl\i8
~~.t,.s,
(11 )
6.12.040 Residential Facilities Capacity Fees.
A. Policy. Any new residential connector shall pay a
Facilities Capacity Fee in an amount which will fund its
proportionate share of the expansion of the collection system,
treatment plant facilities, outfall facilities, and solids
handling and disposal facilities related to the provision of
capacity for the residential unit of the new connector now and in
the future. Capi tal expansion costs shall be estimated pursuant
to the policies and findings set forth within this Chapter.
B. Establishment of zones. The District Board of Directors,
wi th regard to providing additional capacity for new connectors,
shall establish zones within the District as a whole in order to
more equitably establish fees for locations within the District
having differing costs. Initially two zones shall be
established. By establishment of these two zones, all property
for which the estimated cost of providing sewer collection
facilities and related capital improvements is similar shall be
included wi thin the same zone. Zone 1 shall include all users
served completely by the gravity collection system, whereas Zone 2
shall include all users that require district operated sewage
pumping facilities to reach the gravity collection system. The
fees established for Zone 1 and Zone 2 shall differ in proportion
to the differences in costs attributable to providing capacity for
new users within each Zone.
C. Basis
based on
providing
capacity
for fees. Fees for a residential unit shall be set
the District's determination of the total cost for
for capital improvements needed to ~xpand sewerage
resulting from added burden, including all projected
(12 )
..._-_._--_.,_.__..__.".._-~-_._---_..-_._------_._.-._---,---~---,.,._---_..._--
future users, divided by the number of new resi~ential unit
equivalents to be connected. The fee for a residential unit shall
be based upon both the flow characteristics and strength
characteristics for an average residential unit as determined by
wastewater industry standards and specific studies undertaken by
the District and other sewer entities. Fees for multiple
residential units shall be determined by multiplying the number of
individual residential units within said developments by the
standard residential unit fee for the Zone within which the
facility is located.
D. Additional Residential Units. Each residential unit shall
be subject to a full Facilities Capacity Fee as set forth herein.
In the event a separate additional residential unit is
constructed on a parcel, whether or not in compliance with
applicable government regulations, an additional fee for that
residential unit shall become due. The creation of a dwelling
space which accommodates an additional separate living area within
a parcel, whether or not said additional separate living area is
constructed within the original building or is a detached
building, shall subject the parcel to assessment of an additional
residential unit fee. An additional separate living area shall be
defined as an area designed for the purpose of separate habitation
which contains both a bathroom and kitchen, as well as a
multipurpose or bedroom area.
6.10.050 Nonresidential Facilities Capacity Fees
A. Policy. Facilities Capacity Fees shall be charged fc.c each
new connection of a nonresidential building and for each change of
(13 )
use from residential to nonresidential or nonresidential structure
which creates an added burden. It is the policy of this Chapter
that nonresidential users pay their proportionate share of costs
of capital expansions of the District's facilities occasioned by
connection of new users now and in the future. Facilities
Capacity Fees for nonresidential -connectors shall be determined
based on the relationship of the nonresidential user's flow and
strength demands to that of an average residential unit. The
differentiation in fees as between Zone 1 and Zone 2 users, as set
forth in 6.12.030(b), shall also apply to nonresidential users.
B. Use of Residential Uni t Equivalence Factors. There shall be
established a system of Residential Unit Equivalence factors
(hereinafter referred to as "RUE") for each identifiable
nonresidential user group wi thin the District. The RUE factor
shall be determined by considering wastewater flow and wastewater
strength parameters for each user group in relation to the
residential unit. The wastewater flow and wastewater strength
parameters shall be determined for residential units based on flow
and strength data available within the wastewater treatment
industry, as well as data obtained from studies of the
characteristics of the wastewater flow within the District of
residential units. The factors considered in developing the RUE
shall include the wastewater flow and wastewater strength
comparison between residential and nonresidential use. An
allocation of costs between flow and strength parameters based on
their respective contribution to the added burden will be employed.
C. User Groups. The district shall det~rmine which categories
of nonresidential users may be prope~ly categorized into user
(14 )
groups having similar flow and strength characteristics. The RUE
factor will be developed for each user group based on the flow and
strength characteristics of that user group.
A further
determination shall be made with regard to each user group as to
the unit-of-measure which most accurately demonstrates a positive
correlation between the actual flow from a particular user and a
tangible criteria of measurement.
The unit-of-measure may vary
between user groups.
D.
Calculation
of
the
Facilities
Capacity
Fee
For
Nonresidential Uses.
1. The Facilities Capacity Fee for any parcel within the
District's boundaries imposing an added burden to the
sewerage system shall be based on anticipated use and
shall equal the product of the estimated number of
residential unit equivalents (RUE) which will result
from the added burden, as determined in paragraph (2)
of this section, and the Facilities C~pacity Fee rate
determined pursuant to Section 6.12.020 hereof.
2.
Calculation of
the Number of Residential
Unit
Equivalents Bein9 Connected.
The anticipated use of
the sewerage system shall be calculated in terms of
RUE. The number of RUE shall be determined by the
following formula:
+ C
TSSC
+ B
ACTUAL NUMBER OF
X UNITS-OF-MEASURE
RUE -
(15 )
-
.
A = The proportion of the total capital costs
required to construct an incremental expansion
of
the
sewerage
system
of
the
existing
configuration for conveyance, treatment, and
disposal of wastewater which is attributable to
flow,
B = The proportion of the total capital costs
required to construct an incremental expansion
of
the
sewarage
system
of
the
existing
configuration for conveyance, treatment, and
disposal of wastewater which is attributable to
BOD,
C = The proportion of the total capital costs
required to construct an incremental expansion
of
the
sewerage
system
of
the
existing
conf iguration for conveyance,
treatment and
disposal of wastewater which is attributable to
total suspended solids,
FL~O Average flow of wastewater from a residential
unit in gallons per day,
BODRO Average loading of Biochemical Oxygen Demand in
the wastewater from a residential unit in pounds
per day,
TSSRO Average loading of total suspended solids in the
wastewater from a residential unit in pounds per
day,
(16 )
FLOe= Flow of wastewater which will enter the sewerage
system via each specified unit-of-measure in
gallons per d.ay,. l ~ ~"q. B,
8,..J.e,.~1 I~
BODe = Loading of 8ielelJP.eal xygen Demand which will
enter the sewerage system via each specified
unit-of-measure in pounds per day,
TSSc= Loading of total suspended solids which will
enter the sewerage system via each specified
unit-of-measure in pounds per day,
and where
FL~U ' BODRU ' TS~U
A, B, and C shall be
determined from time to time by the General
Manager-Chief
Engineer
in
accordance
with
accepted engineering standards.
3. The number of RUE attributable to a parcel from which
wastewater is discharged shall be calculated using
mean loadings per unit-of-measure for each connecting
parcel's user category which shall be adopted from
time to time by the Board of Directors of the
District.
The mean loadings per uni t-of-measure for
flow in gallons per day, BOD in pounds per day, and
total suspended solids in pounds per day shall be
based upon the best data
currently available,
including updated sampling. information and data from
other jurisdictions and publications.
4 . For the purpose of determining whether the number of
RUE attributable to a nonresidential parcel has
increased, the existing number of RUE shall be based
(17 )
upon the units-of-measure of the parcel existing
immediately prior to construction of the improvement
or other occurrence that brought about the increased
use.
5. For the purpose of determining the number of RUE
attributable to a parcel from which industrial
wastewater is discharged, flow, BOD and total
suspended solids loadings shall be based on the
following, including the estimated sanitary wastewater
loadings:
(a) For new dischargers, information contained in
the Permit for Industrial Wastewater Discharge
as defined in the Source Control Ordinance, or
(b) For existing dischargers, information contained
in the Source Control Ordinance or an approved
permi t for industrial wastewater discharge, or
other credible information, including District's
monitoring data.
E. Special Studies. The fee structure adopted by the Board of
Directors shall provide procedures for determining the Facilities
Capacity Fees for certain nonresidential user groups by use of a
special study. The user groups for which special studies are
required to set the Facilities Capacity Fee for particular users
shall include those user groups where there is widely varying data
as to wastewater flow and strength as between users in that group
and for which no RUE factors have been established by ordinance.
If an individual user within a user group believes that the
applicable Facilities Capacity Fee as set by use of an established
(18 )
RUE factor is unreasonably high based on the specific user's
anticipated wastewater flow and strength, that user may request
that a special study be conducted by District staff to determine
the appropriate fee. Such study shall be undertaken upon payment
by the user of the cost for such study. All special studies,
whether occasioned by the connection of a user from a user group
for which a a RUE factor has not been established by ordinance or
requested by a user within a group for which a RUE factor has been
established, shall be based upon an engineering application of the
principles set forth in this Chapter and subsequent fee ordinances
to the particular wastewater flow and strength factors of the user
seeking the special study.
F. Reevaluation of Fee. In the event that a user's connection
is permitted which may, in the judgment of the General
Manager-Chief Engineer, result in discharge of wastewater with
unusual characteristics or where the flow and strength
characteristics of that user's wastewater may be difficult to
estimate prospectively, such user's Facilities Capacity Fee
determination shall be subject to a reevaluation study after one,
three or five years of connection and observation. If the
reevaluation study demonstrates that the Facilities Capacity Fee
imposed does not reflect the actual flow and strength
characteristics of the user's wastewater discharge, then an
additional fee may be imposed or credit issued thereafter based on
the actual flow and strength characteristics as determined by the
reevaluation study.
(19 )
6.12.060 Change of Use.
A. Added Burden. Any change in use for a parcel which results
in an added burden on the District's facilities will subject that
parcel to an additional Facilities Capacity Fee for the added
burden. Any person who causes an added burden to be imposed shall
pay a Facilities Capacity Fee in accordance with this Chapter.
Wi th respect to discharges which constitute an increase in the
existing strength and/or quantity of wastewater attributable to a
particular parcel or operation which is already connected to the
District's sewerage system, such additional Facilities Capacity
Fee shall be determined based on the added burden placed on the
sewerage system as measured ,by the applicable unit-of-measure.
When change in use requires that the parcel be reclassified to a
different user group, the applicable fee shall be calculated using
the RUE factor for the new user group.
It shall be the duty of the owner of the parcel as well as
any other person made responsible under this Chapter for payment
of fees, to notify the District of any added burden imposed upon
the owner's parcel or within the operations thereon prior to the
change of use or immediately upon learning of the change of use,
whichever comes first.
6.12.070 Credits.
A. Demolition/Chanqe in Use Credit. A credit may be allowed
where new construction replaces a demolished building, if the
demolished building had been legally connected to the sewerage
system, or where a change in use of a building which has been
(20)
connected to the sewage system takes place. The credit for a
demolished building shall be equal to the Facilities Capacity Fee
that would have been paid if the demolished building were to be
connected under the terms of this Chapter, based on the current
Facilities Capacity Fee rate.
The credit for a change in use of a parcel which has
previously been legally connected to the sewerage system shall be
based upon the RUE factors and the unit-of-measure existing
immediately prior to the construction of the improvement or
occurrence that brought about the increased change in use under
the terms of this Chapter and based on the current Facilities
Capacity Fee rates.
The credit provided above shall be based on the highest use
(the greatest burden on the District) for which a Facilities
Capacity Fee (predecessor connection fees) has been paid at the
current Facilities Capacity Fee rate.
It shall be the responsibility of the applicant for a credit
to demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the General
Manager-Chief Engineer the user group and the unit-of-measure
which was applied to a demolished building or the building for
which there was a former use. Further, the applicant shall
demonstrate that such building was legally connected to the sewer
system. In the case that a demolition credit is claimed, the
applicant shall demonstrate that the building's side sewer has
been properly abandoned and the applicable abandonment fees have
been paid. The credits provided for above shall be applicable
only to the specific p".rcel upon which demolition or change of use
has occurred and shall be allocable to the owner of such parcel.
(21)
B. Watershed Credit In the event that a parcel owner has
paid watershed fees under prior ordinances for a particular parcel
(or a parcel owner has completed sewer improvements agreed to by
the District in lieu of payment of watershed fees) I the parcel
owner will be given credit against the total new amount of
Facili ties Capacity Fee for the previously paid watershed fees.
The credit shall be in the amount of the watershed fee paid on the
parcel or the amount of the watershed fee for said parcel in
effect immediately prior to the effective date of this Chapter I
whichever is greater.
6.12.080 Repeal of Prior Fees.
Sections of the District Code providing for collection of a
watershed fee shall be repealed on July 11 19891 subject to such
provisions for its continued use for calculation of phased in new
rates as may be permitted by this Section and Section 6.12.030(K)
of this Chapter. The Board finds that based on an accounting of
the current watershed accounts that the watershed fee revenue has
been applied to the purposes for which the fees were collected and
that each of the watershed fees accounts had been exhausted as of
June 30 I 1988 I with the exception of watersheds 2 I 3 I 8, 10, 111
13, 15, 24 and 27. The Board further finds that the monies
retained in these watershed accounts have been allocated in the
District's Capital Improvement Plan to future projects and that
said projects will be of the nature and variety for which the
watershed fees were initially collected.
The ordinance enacting t'.is Chapter shall supersede and
repeal the District's existing ordinanceL regarding the collection
(22)
of connection fees as set forth in District Code Chapter 6. 12
(Fixture Charges), Chapter 6.08 (Annexation Fees) and further, in
Sections 6.20.020 and 6.20.030 wi thin Chapter 6.20 of the Code.
The repeal shall Occur on July I, 1989, simultaneous with the
taking effect of the new provisions set forth herein and in
Chapter 6.08. However, nothing in the ordinance enacting this
Chapter is intended to repeal, extinguish, suspend Or allow to
lapse any obligation to pay fees under prior ordinances, which
obligation accrued on or before July 1, 1989, or for fees
calculated under prior ordinances which may come due on or after
July 1, 1989 and before July 1, 1990. It is the specific intent
of this Chapter that all obligations to pay fees arising before
July 1, 1989 shall remain in effect and the obligations to pay
fees calculated under the terms of prior ordinances which may
arise between July 1, 1989 and July 1, 1990 shall remain in full
effect.
(23)
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 1
The fees computed in accordance with this Table 1 shall be applied to all
new connections or added burdens for which the building permit has been
issued by the appropriate jurisdictional authority, or the District has
affixed its stamp approving construction on the pertinent building plans,
or, in the case of a new subdivision, the District has approved the
construction plans for the developer-installed sewer system to serve the
subdivision, before July 1, 1989, provided that the new connection or
added burden occurs and the appropriate fee is paid before January 1,
1990, in the case of residential development and before July 1, 1990, in
the case of non-residential development.
The fees computed under this Table 1 are computed based on the District's
fee structure which existed immediately prior to July 1, 1989. These
fees incl ude an approximate 15 percent increase over the pre-exi sti ng
rates for non-residential development. The Watershed Fees and Fixture
Fees, including the Basic Fixture Rate Schedule for Ordinary Plumbing
Fixtures, Special Commercial and Public Fixture Charges, Charges for
Multi-Storied Buildings, Minimum Charges, and Fixture Multiples, are
included in this table only for the purpose of calculating the amount of
the fee to be imposed. This fee table is designed as part of a phased
implementation timetable for the Facilities Capacity Fee system, which
timetable is intended to mitigate the potential near-term financial
impact on residential and non-residential development. In no event shall
the Facilities Capacity Fee for residential units for which this table is
appl icabl e exceed the sum of the Watershed pl us Fixture Fees which were
appl icable immediately prior to July 1, 1989, or $1,760 for Zone I or
$2,010 for Zone II.
The Facil ities Capacity Fees for residential and non-residential
connections shall be calculated ~s follows:
Facilities Capacity Fee = Watershed Fee + Fixture Fee
FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The following Watershed Fees shall apply (RU = Residential Unit):
WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED
NUt-f3ER FEE NUt-f3ER FEE NUt-f3ER FEE
(PER RU) (PER RU) (PER RU)
2 $520 22 $300 33SP $1,253
3 $520 23 $300 34N $ 300
8 $500 24 $300 34S $ 300
10 $300 '2J $300 35N $ 300
11 $300 29N $300 35S $1,050
13 $300 29S $300 43 $ 300
15 $300 33 $500 44 $ 800
----->.. _.~_...--~..~---_.,--'''~......_._.~._---_._----_._--_.----.___~,___...,____"._"~."._,.,..._,~_____"'..,.w.__,.._'._."_~__
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
The Fi xture Fee shall be computed as follows:
Fixture Fee = $225 + $112.50 per bath
FEES FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The following watershed fees shall apply:
WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED WATERSHED
NUM3ER FEE NUM3ER FEE NUM3ER FEE
(PER ACRE) (PER ACRE) (PER ACRE)
2 $600 22 $ 575 33SP $4,025
3 $600 23 $ 920 34N $ 690
8 $575 24 $ 575 34S $ 690
10 $575 27 $ 575 35N $ 690
11 $575 29N $ 690 35S $2,300
13 $575 29S $ 690 43 $ 690
15 $575 33 $1,150 44 $2,875
The Fixture Fee shall be computed as follows:
Fixture Fee = Fixture Count x Fixture Multiple x Fixture Rate
Basic Fixture Rate Schedule for Ordinary Plumbing Fixtures Connected to
the Sewer System
(1) toil et
(2) f1 oor drai n
(3) lavatory
(4) bath or shower
(5) 1 aundry outl et
(6) sink and auxiliary appliances
(7) swimming pool backwash
$ 26.00
$ 26.00
$ 26.00
$ 78.00
$130.00
$130.00
0.259 per sq. foot of pool
surface
Special Commercial and Public Fixture Charges
Garbage grinder and disposal
Dental chair, drinking fountain
Automatic washing machine
Floor drain
Urinal
Types of special fixture not listed
$173.00 + $173 per horsepower
$ 18.00
$432.00
$ 87.00
$ 87 .00
Special Study
Charges for Multi-Storied Buildings (over two stories)
The fixture charge shall be at the rate of $46 per fixture unit
equivalent and shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth
in Chapter 4 of the Uniform Pl umbi ng Code publ i shed by the Internati onal
--'--,-----.".,..-,---.------.---__~~__________"__..,,"__~._,__""_.._,_..._..___"_._,...,_...___.___ _" ....u_~__._.....~._._.__.._..______.,.____,_..~__.,__._...____._'___,~_..,_._.._..._.______.__
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1976 Edition, as
partially listed and modified below.
Kind of Fixture* Minimum Trap Size Units
Bath Tub 1-1/2 inch 2
Floor Drain 2 inch 2
Laundry Outlet 1-1/2 inch 2
Shower, Single Stall 2 inch 2
Sinks and/or Dishwasher 1-112 inch 2
(residential)
Garbage Disposal 1-1/ 2 inch 2
(residential)
Wash Basin (lavatory) 1-1/4 inch 1
single
Water Closet (toilet) 3 inch 4
tank type
*For fixtures not 1 isted above or in Chapter 4 of the Uniform Pl umbing
Code, the water supply pipe size, as 1 isted below, or two fixture unit
equivalents for each gallon per minute of flow discharged shall be used.
Pipe Size
3/8 inch
1/2 inch
3/4 inch
1 inch
General
Auditorium, bank, bakery,
barber, or beauty shop
church, cleaning plant,
delicatessen, department
store, drug store, dog
kennel, fire house,
grocery, hall, meat
market, medical or
office building
Types of uses not listed
hereon
Cocktail lounge, bar, club,
gas station, garage,
restaurant, fountain,
drive-in, funeral parlor
Convalescent hospital,
rest home, hospital
Creamery, food processor
Factory, industry
Multi-use building, each
use
School
Units
2
4
6
10
Minimum Char~e
Fixture Multiple
$432.00
3
$432.00
$863.00
3
5
$173.00
$863 .00
$432.00
$432.00
$190.00
Per Bed
Sped al Study
Special Study
By Use
Per Classroom
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITY CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 2
The fees computed in accordance with this Table 2 shall be applied to all
new connecti ons or added bu rdens for which the buil di ng permit has been
issued by the appropriate jurisdictional authority, or the District has
affixed its stamp approving construction on the pertinent building plans,
or, in the case of a new subdivision, the District has approved the
construction plans for the developer-installed sewer system to serve the
subdivision, before July 1, 1990, provided that the new connection or
added burden occurs and the appropriate fee is paid before July 1, 1991,
excepting only those new connections or added burdens to which Table 1
appl ies.
The fees computed under th i s Tabl e 2 are based on the fee structure
established by District Code Title 6 provisions, as amended effective
July 1, 1989. The rates indicated for non-residential development are
part of a phased implementation timetable for the Facilities Capacity Fee
system which is intended to mitigate the potential near-term impacts of
the fee system on non-residential developments. The non-residential fees
set forth in this Table 2 are intended to generally reflect fee amounts
which are approximately mi dway between pre-exi sti ng fees and the fully
implemented non-residential fees calculated under the principles set
forth in the amended Title 6 of the District as are reflected in Table 3
of this Schedule of Facilities Capacity Fees.
Facilities Capacity Fee $1,760/R.U.E.
Pumped Zone Fee $250/R.U.E.
Zone 1 Fee = Facilities Capacity Fee
Zone 2 Fee = Facilities Capacity Fee + Pumped Zone Fee
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(l)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
RESIDENTIAL
LU
LA
LM
Single-Family Residences
Apartments
Mobile Home Parks
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Dwell i ng Unit
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Plumbing Code published by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(l)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
STANDARD COMERCIAL
AB Auto Body/Painting Fi xture Unit 0.063 0.068
AD Auto Dealerships Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
AL Ai rl ine Services Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
AR Auto Repair/Maintenance Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
AS Service Stations Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BB Barbers/Beauty Salons Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
BC Dry Cl eaners Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BE Equipment Repair/Repair Services Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BH Meeting Halls Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BK Contractors/Business Services Fi xture Un it 0.063 0.068
BN Nurseries/Lumber Yards Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BP Parki ng Lots Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BT Transportation Services Fixture Unit 0.063 0.068
BZ Miscellaneous Commercial (other) Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
EA Auditoriums/Theaters Fi xture Unit 0.063 o .068
EG Golf Courses/Country Cl ubs Fixture Unit 0.063 o . 06 8
EH Hea 1 th Cl ubs/ Spas Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
EM Entertainment Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
ET Tennis Courts Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
IW Warehouses Fi xture Unit 0.063 0.068
LC Common Areas Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
OV Veterinary Cl inics Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
RN Bars (no food service) Fixture Unit 0.063 o .068
LARGE COfotERCIAL
AC Car Washes Speci al Study
BL Laundromats/Laundries Machine (20# cap) 0.826 0.893
BM,BS Markets/Supermarkets Fixture Unit 0.090 0.088
BR,BX Retail/Shopping Centers 1,000 Sq. Ft. 0.265 0.250
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Pl umbing Code publ ished by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(l)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
USER CODES
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
USER GROUPS
EB
EC
ES
HC
HP
lH
LI
08, OM
RS
RT,RD,RI
RC
RB
CM
IE
IH
IP
IR
Bowling Alleys
Cinemas
Swimming Pools
Convalescent Hospitals
Hospitals
Hotels/Motels
Independent Living Facilities
Offices
Lane
Seat
Speci al Study
Bed
Bed
Room
Bed
1,000 sq. ft.
0.394
0.008
0.354
0.786
0.512
0.319
0.200
0.137
0.191
0.041
0.317
0.425
0.009
0.383
0.850
0.553
o .319
0.119
0.089
0.119
0.027
0.170
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Pl umbi ng Code publ i shed by the Internati onal
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
RESTAURANTS
Restaurants (dine-in)
Restaurants (paper service/
no di shwashi ng)
Banquet Facilities
Seats
Fixture Units
Seats
______'_.__o__________________._____.,',__.._____.,_~~.___.___._...".,.,__,....'_.___...~..,_"___...,__,_._,_._____~_,~.,__.._._~_____
BAKERIES
Bakeri es
Fixture Unit
SUPERMARKETS WITH GARBAGE
DISPOSAL
MORlUARIES
Speci al Study
Cemetaries/Mortuaries
Special Study
INDUSTRIES
Electronic Industries
Heavy Industrial
Permitted Industries
Laboratories/Research
Speci al Study
Speci al Study
Special Study
Special Study
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(l)
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
SCHOOlS (PRIVATE)
SD, SE, SH,
SI, SU
Schools-with cafeteria and
gym! showers
Schools-with cafeteria and
no gym! showers
Schools-without cafeteria
or gym! showers
Cl ass room
o .731
0.085
Cl ass room
0.439
0.510
Cl ass room
0.366
0.425
SCHOOlS (PmlIC)
Sped al Study
CHURCHES, NON-PROFIT
CH
OS
Churches
Services/Fraternal Offices
Fi xture Unit
Fixture Unit
o .079
o .079
0.085
0.085
GOVERNfENT FACIlmESI OFFICES
Sped al Study
EP Parks/Playgrounds
OG Government Offices
SPECIAl BIllINGS
Sped al Study
UTIlmES
Sped al Study
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Pl umbing Code publ ished by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 3
The fees computed in accordance with this Table 3 shall be applied to all
new connections or added burdens for which the building permit has been
issued by the appropriate jurisdictional authority, or the District has
affixed its stamp approving construction on the pertinent building plans,
or, in the case of a new subdivision, the District has approved the
construction plans for the developer-installed sewer system to serve the
subdivision, after June 30, 1990.
Facilities Capacity Fee $1,866/R.U.E.
Pumped Zone Fee $265/R.U.E.
Zone 1 Fee = Facilities Capacity Fee
Zone 2 Fee = Facilities Capacity Fee + Pumped Zone Fee
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(I)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
RESIDENTIAl
LU
LA
LM
Single-Family Residences
Apartments
Mobile Home Parks
STANDARD COM'4ERCIAl
AB Auto Body/Painting
AD Auto Dealerships
AL Airline Services
AR Auto Repair/Maintenance
AS Service Stations
BB Barbers/Beauty Salons
BC Dry Cleaners
BE Equipment Repair/Repair Services
BH Meeting Halls
BK Contractors/Business Services
BN Nurseries/Lumber Yards
BP Parking Lots
BT Transportation Services
R. U. Eo FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
Dwell ing Unit
Owell ing Unit
Dwelling Unit
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Fixture Unit _ 0.074 0.080
Fixture Unit o . 074 0.080
Fi xture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit 0.074 0.080
Fixture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit o .074 0.080
Fi xture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit o .074 0.080
Fi xture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit o .074 0.080
Fixture Unit o . 07 4 0.080
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Plumbing Code published by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
,--------,,' .-.._.._-_._-"-_.__._------~,..~"---_.....-----,-_.,_.._,--'---.-..-..-----.
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 3 (CONTINUED)
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(I)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
BZ
EA
EG
EH
EM
ET
IW
LC
OV
RN
AC
BL
BM,BS
BR, BX
EB
EC
ES
HC
HP
LH
LI
OB,OM
RS
RT,RD,RI
RC
Miscellaneous Commercial (other)
Auditoriums/Theaters
Gol f Courses/Country Cl ubs
Hea 1 th Cl ubs/ Spas
Entertainment
Tenni s Courts
Warehouses
Common Areas
Veterinary Cl inics
Bars (no food service)
LARGE COMoERCIAL
Car Washes
Laundromats/Laundries
Markets/Supermarkets
Retail/Shopping Centers
Bowl ing Alleys
Cinemas
Swimming Pools
Convalescent Hospitals
Hospitals
Hotels/Motels
Independent Living Facilities
Offices
RESTAURANTS
Restaurants (dine-in)
Restaurants (paper service/
no di shwashi ng)
Banquet Facilities
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fi xture Unit
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
0.074
0.074
o .074
0.074
o .074
0.074
0.074
o .074
o .074
o .074
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
Speci al Study
Machine (20# cap) o . 97 2 1.050
Fixture Unit 0.162 0.175
1,000 Sq. Ft. 0.463 0.500
Lane 0.463 0.500
Seat 0.009 0.010
Speci al Study
Bed o .416 0.450
Bed 0.925 1.000
Room 0.602 0.650
Bed 0.375 0.375
1,000 sq. ft. 0.277 0.299
Seats
Fixture Units
Seats
0.259
0.347
0.078
0.177
0.237
0.053
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Plumbing Code published by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 3 (CONTINUED)
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(l)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
UNIT -OF-
MEASURE ( 2)
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
CAPACITY ZONE
FEE FEE
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
BAKERIES
RB
CM
IE
IH
IP
IR
SD, SE, SH,
SI, su
CH
OS
Bakeries
Fixture Unit
0.200
0.373
SUPERMARKETS WIlH GARBAGE
DISPOSAl
Special Study
t<<lRlUARIES
Cemetaries/Mortuaries
Speci a 1 Study
INDUSTRIES
Electronic Industries
Heavy Industri al
Permitted Industries
Laboratories/Research
Sa-IOOlS ( PRIVATE)
Speci al Study
Speci al Study
Speci al Study
Speci al Study
Schools-with cafeteria and
gym/ showers
Schools-with cafeteria and
no gym/showers
Schools-without cafeteria
.or gym/ showers
Classroom
1.000
0.860
Cl ass room
0.516
0.600
Cl ass room
o .430
0.500
Sa-IOOlS (PWlIC)
Special Study
CHURa-IES.. NON-PROFIT
Churches
Services/Fraternal Offices
Fixture Unit
Fixture Unit
0.093
0.093
0.100
0.100
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform Plumbing Code published by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
EXH IS IT B
SCHEDULE OF FACILITIES CAPACITY FEES
TABLE 3 (CONTINUED)
RESIDENTIAL UNIT EQUIVALENCE (R.U.E.) FACTORS(l)
R.U.E. = Unit-of-Measure Count Multiplied
Times the R.U.E. Factor
USER CODES
USER GROUPS
R.U.E. FACTOR
FACILITIES PUMPED
UNIT-OF- CAPACITY ZONE
MEASURE(2) FEE FEE
GOVERNPENT FACILmES/OFFICES
Special Study
EP Parks/Playgrounds
OG Government Offices
SPECIAl BILLINGS
Sped a 1 Study
Sped al Study
UTILmES
(1) Fees for multi-use buildings shall be determined by considering each use
separately.
(2) Unit-of-Measure shall mean the basic unit which quantifies the degree of use of
a particular parcel (e.g., dwelling unit, square footage). Square footage of an
improvement shall be based upon the gross exterior dimensions of the structure.
Fixture units shall be based on the fixture unit equivalents set forth in
Chapter 4 of the Uniform P1 umbing Code publ ished by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, 1979 Edition.
.
Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ....~strict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE OF 3
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
IV.
BIDS AND AWARDS
1
SUBJECT DATE
May 1, 1989
AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANDES CONSTRUCTION, INC. TYPE OF ACTION
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4215,
HOLCOMB COURT SEWER RELOCATION, PHASE 2 AUTHORIZE AWARD
SUBMITTED BY
Tad J. Pilecki
Associate En ineer
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Engineering Department
Engineering Division
ISSUE: On April 26, 1989, sealed proposals were received and opened for the
construction of District Project No. 4215, Holcomb Court Sewer Relocation,
Phase 2. The Board must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within 60
days of the opening of the bids.
BACKGROUND: In 1986, District Proje~t 4046, San Ramon Bypass Sewer Relocation,
was constructed to make way for construction of the San Ramon Bypass Channel in
Walnut Creek. As a part of the relocation project, an interim pump station was
const'ructed to serve the Holcomb Court area. This pump station will now be
abandoned and replaced by 192 lineal feet of permanent gravity sewer system under
District Project No. 4215.
Plans and specifications for the project were completed by District staff, and the
project was advertised on April 13 and 20, 1989. Five (5) bids ranging from
$38,380 to $49,690 were received on April 26, 1989. A summary of bids is shown in
Attachment 1. The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial
evaluation of the bids and concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is Andes
Construction, Inc. with a bid of $38,380. The Engineer's Estimate for
construction is $44,800. The funds required to complete this project are $57,400,
as shown in Attachment 2. The total project cost is anticipated to be $70,000.
The Holcomb Court Sewer Relocation, Phase 2, was included in the 1987-88 Capital
Improvement Budget beginning at page CS-43. The project was deferred into 1988-89
at the request of the Contra Costa County Flood Control District. All costs
associated with the project will be reimbursed by the Contra Costa County Flood
Control District.
This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Statute 21080.21 since it
involves a pipeline of less than one mile in length which will be located in an
easement. A Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Clerk.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a construction contract in the amount of
$38,380 to Andes Construction, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder for the
Holcomb Court Sewer Relocation Project, Phase 2, District Project 4215.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
@~J
1302A-9/85
DRW
ptJf.J
RAB
Centra 'Contra Costa Sanr--,ry District
SUMMARY OF BIDS
PROJECT NO. 4215
Holcomb Ct Sewer Reloc Ph II
DATE April 26. 1989
ENGR. EST.~ 44,800
LOCATION Holcomb Ct - South Broadway, W.C.
It
W BIDDER (Name, telephone & address) BID PRle.
Andes Construction Company ( 415) 562-4960 $
1 2208 Damuth St.. Oakland CA 94602 38,380
Bay Area General Engineers ( 415) 820-2746 $
2 Box 350, Diablo, CA 94528 39.500
MGM Construction Company ( 415) 685-8812 $
3 P.O. Box 5757, Concord, CA 94524 (46,300) $50,800
~
Jardin Pipeline. Inc. ( 415) 782-5335 $
4 P.O. Box 20817, Castro Valley, CA 94546 48,900
-
William G. McCullough Company ( 415) 757-1394 $
5 P.O. Box 2119, Antioch. CA 94531-2119 49,690
( ) $
( ) $
( ) $
( ) $
( ) $
( ) $
( ) $
PREPARED BY
DATE
SHEET NO.
OF
2503-11/84
Item
4
ATTACHMENT 2
HOLCOMB COURT SEWER RELOCATION, PHASE 2
POST BID PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
Description
Total
Percent of
Construction
Contract
Costs
100
17.4
2.2
32.6
152.2
(1) Contingency will be used for change orders, force account, or
engineering assistance as necessary.
1
$38,380
Construction Contract
2
Construction Contingency (1)
7,620
Subtotal
46,000
3
Construction Management
8,000
Consultants
1,000
5
15,000
Prebid Expenditure
6
70,000
Total Project Cost Estimate
7
<12,600>
$57,400
Funds Previously Authorized
8
Total Funds Required to Complete
Project
.
Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE OF 4
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
IV.
BIDS AND AWARDS
2
SUBJECT
DATE
May 1, 1989
AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO
MOUNTAIN CASCADE AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR THE MARTINEZ
EARLY START SEWER PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4429
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE AWARD
AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT
SUBM~J~~r~ W. Swanson
Principal Engineer
INITlttl.'f!<iR~~Tr''i!l:Yg Depar tmen t
Engineering Division
ISSUE: On April 27, 1989, sealed proposals were received and opened for the
construction of District Project No. 4429, Martinez Early Start Sewer Project.
The Board of Directors must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within
60 days of the opening of the bids. Authorization by the Board is required to
execute consulting engineering agreements greater than $50,000.
BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors authorized preparation of a facilities plan
for upgrading the Martinez portion of the District system in 1987. One of the
first efforts of facilities planning was to identify critical overflow problems in
the c9l1ection system so that design and correction of the overflow problems could
begin prior to completion of the facilities plan for the entire' Martinez area
collection system. The "early start" sewer improvements include installation of
2,200 feet of new 27-inch trunk sewer along Berrel1esa Street and the Embarcadero
to the Martinez Pump Station. Approximately 300, 500, and 800 feet, respectively,
of new 8-inch sewer will be constructed along Marina Vista Street, Lower
Berrellesa Street, and Brown and Arreba streets near Cappy Ricks Park. Also
included in the Early Start Project are repairs to 26 existing manholes and
construction of 7 new manholes or rodding inlets along existing Martinez sewers.
Plans and specifications for the project were completed by John Carollo Engineers,
and the project was advertised on April 3 and 10, 1989. Six bids ranging from
$1,164,512 to $1,756,365 were received on April 27, 1989. A summary of bids is
shown in Attachment 1. The Engineering Department conducted a technical and
commercial evaluation of the bids and concluded that the lowest responsible bidder
is Mountain Cascade, Inc. for the bid amount of $1,164,512. The Engineer's
Estimate for construction is $1,341,000. The funds required to complete this
project are $1,615,800 as shown in Attachment 2. The total project cost is
anticipated to be $1,805,000.
District staff will administer the contract and provide inspection services.
Resident engineering and office engineering services, including shop drawing
review, will be provided by John Carollo Engineers (JCE). A cost reimbursement
agreement has been negotiated with JCE with a cost ceiling of $120,000.
The Martinez Early Start Sewer Project is included in the 1988-89 Capital
Improvement Budget (p. CS-36 to p C-38).
This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Statute 21080.21 since it
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
1302A.9/85
CWS
DRW
RAB
R./'IEF ENG.
~/fi__
ROGER J. DOLAN
(}~J
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO
MOUNTAIN CASCADE AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR THE MARTINEZ
EARLY START SEWER PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4429
POSITION PAPER
PAGE 2 OF 4
DATE
May 1, 1989
involves a pipeline
streets or easements.
of less than one mile in length which will be located in
A Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Clerk.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of contract for the amount of $1,164,512 for
construction of the Martinez Early Start Sewer Project, District Project No. 4429,
to Mountain Cascade, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder. Authorize the General
Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a cost reimbursement agreement with a cost
ceiling of $120,000 with John Carollo Engineers.
13028-9/85
ATTACHMENT 1
Martinez Early Start Sewer Project
District Project 4429
Summary of Bids
Bidder
Bid
$ 1,164,512
1,190,829
1,343,431
1,480,233
1,487,230
1,756,365
Mountain Cascade, Inc.
Dalton Construction Co.
McGuire and Hester
Antovich Construction, Inc.
W. H. Ebert Corp.
MGM Construction Co.
Engineer's Estimate
1 ,341 ,000
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ATTACHMENT 2
MARTINEZ EARLY START SEWER PROJECT
DISTRICT PROJECT 4429
SUMMARY OF FUNDS
Description
Construction Contract
Gas main relocations by PG&E
Railroad and encroachment permit -
related costs
Contingency at 15 percent
Subtotal
Force Account
*Administration/Inspection
*Surveying
*Public Information Program
*Legal
*Engineering
Subtotal
Consultants/Contractors
*Resident Engineering (JCE)
Engineering Services During
Construction (JCE)
*Geotechnical Services (Wahler)
*Material Testing
Subtotal
Prebid Expenditures (Design)
TOTAL PROJECT COST
Funds Previously Authorized
Total Funds Required to
Complete Project
Total
$1,164,512
4,000
20,000
178,288
1,366,800
76,000
15,000
3,000
2,000
3,000
99,000
96,000
24,000
10,000
20,000
150,000
189,200
1,805,000
<189,200>
S 1. 615 . 800
Percent of
Construction
Contract
Costs
100.0
5.6
1... 1
0.2
0.1
0.2
7.0
1.8
0.7
1.5
13.8
132.1
.
Centrh. Contra Costa Sanitar'~ .Jistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 4
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
M
4
1989
NO.
IV.
BIDS AND AWARDS 3
SUBJECT
DATE
JlUTHORIZE fW AAD OF CONTRACT TO CONSo.. IDATED
LANDSCAPE SERVICES, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
TREATMENT PLANT LANDSCAPING PROJECT, PHASE I,
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 10031A
Ma 1, 1989
TYPE OF ACTION
JlUTHORIZE IW ARD
SUBMITTED BY
James L. Bel cher
Associate En ineer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Plant 0 erations De artment
ISSUE: On April 19, 1989, seal ed bids for the Treatment Pl ant Landscaping Project,
Phase I, District Project No. 10031A, were received and publicly opened. The Board
of Directors must award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder or reject all
bids within 60 days of the opening of bids.
BICKGROOND: On May 7, 1987, the Board of Directors authorized a consulting
agreement with the fi rm of Royston Hanamoto All ey and Abey to take the conceptual
design of the Treatment Plant Landscaping Master Plan and develop a biddable set of
pl ans and specifications for the Phase I portion of the project. The Phase I
portion of the project is a landscape design for the main entry to the District
facility off of Imhoff Place. The design incorporates appropriate signing and a
small pond usi ng recl aimed water. (See attached pl an - Attachment 1.) Phase I
design was canpleted, and bids were opened on October 12, 1988. The low bid
received was $467,081, which was considered excessive, and all bids were rejected.
Staff was directed to evaluate alternative designs that could result in significant
savings without diminishing the overall intent and aesthetic value of the project.
Staff and the consul tant produced a rev ised set of draw ings that refl ected the
reduced scope of the project. The signage wall was reduced in length and
strai ghtened, maki ng it easi er and 1 ess costl y to construct. The pond size was cut
in half, and the water spray and lighting systems were simpl ified to reduce costs.
Pl ans and specifications for the project were publicly advertised on March 22, 1989,
and AprilS, 1989. Five bids were received and opened on April 19, 1989. A summary
of the bids is shown in Attachment II. M eval uation of the bids, conducted by
Plant Operations Department staff, concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is
Consol idated Landscape Services, Inc. with a bid price of $298,900. The engineer's
estimate for this project was $270,000. The budget to canplete Phase I of this
proj ect is $399,000, as shown on Attachment III.
This project has been eval uated by staff and determined to be exempt fran the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section
18.5, since it involves a minor alteration to land for landscaping purposes. A
Notice of Exemption has been filed with the county clerk.
REC<MENDATION: Authorize award of the construction contract in the amount of
$298,900 for the Treatment Pl ant Landscaping Project, Phase I, District Project No.
10031A, to Consol i dated Landscape Serv ices, Inc. as the the lowest responsi bl e
bi dder.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
130211.9/85
l ..'-
i-'
~.~.J
--' - .
\
\
\
h;:1
,J ~
",'
r"
!t~ II
t
~ .''1 .~ -
J~ jl.
~ .:!
.,
"
.,# --
.f;'
'r
.....
,
'.
,....
.' '
....
"
/.
...
......
'.
...--:" ....::..
'...
...
...... -
JlTT ACHt1ENT I
~v.
~
.'-.:...
/..1<\
,
.. \.:.,.
"'....
.~....-..... .
"'" J,,11 :-:'.: "- ' . - --' ,/.
,...' )<>1>' /
/-.,,:.'
\
,
/
\
~'";~
.~I
..'
. . .I
,.
I ~ /
.>- .-(J"~" i '
.\~ /' \ /
I.y ,,'. '-
..... /
';' .
........ ..~<./
.- ...
/
_._..._.::_L
',.
.....
1./.,/
.':;-
...;.' I
.' '....
.,
....'
'--'f,:"
. ". ',.
. ,~~~)
/ .....
,
.. '
.'"
"-
",-,,, ,
, t. _ ."
]i
'~l
:j~
.'~ ' ' !
~~' I
:::' i: J : :
1'1: j .
I-
~
II
iZf/I
o "'
~t;
~8
o "'
. ~ ~
il
.
j 1
j j
'JIIlll
hi!! m!
.. .~~
jl~~
I
J
t
ATTACHMENT II
Centrar ~ontra Costa Sani{ ry District
SUMMARY OF BIDS
PROJECT NO.
10031A Treatment Plant Landscaping, Phase IOATE April 19,1989
First Floor Conference Room $ 270 000
ENGR.EST. ,
LOCATION
II:
{yl BIDDER (Nome, telephone & address) .ID PRICE
1 Consol ida.~ed Landscape Services,{ 415) 449-2242 $
46 Rickenbacker Circle, Live~~gre, CA 94550 298,900
Mori Hatsushi and Associates ( ) $
2 3113 Clayton Road, Concord, CPV 94519 305,000
RMT Landc;cape Contractors ( 415) 568-3208 $
520 Doolittle Drive, San Leandro, CA 94577 319,739
3
-
Munkdale Brothers ( ) $
4 1616 Rollins Road, Burlingame, CA 94010 349,327
Dalzell Corporation ( 415) 835-0732 $
5 P.O. Box 8284, Emeryville, CA 94662 375,000
( ) $
-
. ( ) $
( ) $
.
( ) $
-
( ) $
( ) $
( ) $
..
PREPARED BY
James L. Belcher
DATE
04/19/89
SHEET NO.
OF
. ,.________..___._.__"__.,_.__u__,_.__.^'..._.__...___.~,,u_._.___...._.h_..~....____._'...M__.'.....,.___...,.,._'_'___'__'_'m.._._.__",__,_,_"",,~_,,, _ U'" "''''_'_~_'~''_'_'''__''''__''''''_' ..
ATTACHMENT III
Treatment Plant Landscaping Project. Phase I
District Project No. 10031A
Post-Bid/Pre-Construction Estimate
Item
Item
Jlmount
Description
1
Construction Contract
2
Estimated Construction
Contingencies @ 12%
Subtotal
3
Estimated Construction
Inci dental s to Proj ect
Canpl eti on
- District Force Account $37,100
Contract Management
Engineering Service (Royston 10,000
Hanamoto All ey and Abey)
- Testing Services 2,000
Total Estimated Construction
Incidentals
49,100
4
Total Estimated Construction
Cost
5
Additional Pre-Bid Redesign
Expenditures Required
6
TOTIt. NJDITION/l. /l.LOCATION OF FUNDS
REQUIRED TO COR.ElE PROJECT
7
Funds Prey i ousl y Auth orized for
Treatment Plant Landscaping
Master Plan and Phase I Design
51,800
Total
$ 298,900
36,000
$ 334,900
384.000
15,000
$399.000
% Construction
Contract
100
15
.
Central ~ontra Costa SanitarYLJistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 2
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
V.
CONSENT CALENDAR
7
SUBJECT
APPROVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY WITH THE
CITY OF SAN RAMON, JOB 3148, IN THE SAN RAMON AREA
DATE
April 28, 1989
TYPE OF ACTION
APPROVE REAL
PROPERTY AGREEMENT
SUBMITTED BY
Denni sHall
Associate Engineer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Engineering Department/
Construction Division
ISSUE: Board approval is required to permit the city of San Ramon to install and
maintain a concrete walkway, two trees, a landscape sprinkler system, and lawn
area over a portion of a District sewer easement.
BACKGROUND: The city of San Ramon is constructing a publ ic 1 ibrary at the
southeast corner of Bollinger Canyon Road and Market Place in San Ramon. A public
sewer easement and a 10-inch sewer pipe line cross the building site as shown on
the attached map. Certai n site improvements adj acent to the buil di ng have been
constructed over the existing sewer easement.
The plans for the construction of the library were inadvertently not submitted to
the District for review prior to the start of construction. During the early
stages of construction, the fact that the library was being built close to the
exi sti ng sewer and si te improvements were goi ng to be bui 1 t over the sewer was
identified. The additional loads which the building will impart to the existing
sewer were checked and found to be mi nimal . After a seri es of di scussi ons with
San Ramon's engineer, the District agreed to the installation of the improvements
over the existing sewer provided the City enter into an agreement relating to real
property with the District. San Ramon has agreed to follow the District's review
procedure in the future.
Staff has determined that the improvements will not interfere with the present use
of our sewer; however, if the need shoul d arise, the agreement requi res the
property owner to remove the improvements at the owner's expense within 30 days of
notice to do so or bear the District's extraordinary costs associated with working
in and around the site improvements. The agreement protects the District's
easement rights and holds the District harmless from any claims or damages
associated with District facilities as a result of the presence of the site
improvements.
This project (the proposed agreement) 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 the Agreement Relating to Real Property with the city of
San Ramon, Job 3148, authorize the President of the Board of Directors and the
Secretary of the District to execute said agreement, and authorize the agreement
to be recorded.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
JSM
RAB
W~;N;P~o;;..
1302A-9/85 DH
fJlJt
/2lA. . /
(1/("
-_._-_._--~_.~-,.._,-_._-----,-_." - - --------------_._~----------
-
0_
-
'V
~
....,.
.
"-I'
~
~
~
~
..
~
.
,,/ '\
p.opl)
C~10"
ltlF/J--
eP'''
~
~
~
~
r
L-01'
-
o.
'"
'4'
.~
.
REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT
Job 3148
San Ramon Area
.
Central ~ontra Costa SanitarYlJistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
V.
CONSENT CALENDAR 8
SUBJECT
ACCEPT THE CONTRACT WORK FOR THE PHASE 1 1-680/ SR-24
SEWER RELOCATIONS PROJECT (D.P. 4428) AND AUTHORIZE
THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION
DATE
A ril 28, 1989
TYPE OF ACTION
ACCEPT CONTRACT
WORK
SUBMITTED BY
Henry B. Than
Associate Engineer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Engineering Department/
Construction Division
ISSUE: Constructi on has been compl eted on the Phase 1 1-680/ SR-24 Sewer
Relocations Project, and the work is now ready for acceptance.
BACKGROUND: The Phase 1 I-680/SR-24 Sewer Relocations Project was required in
order to accommodate the I-680/SR-24 Interchange Improvements by CalTrans. Major
elements of the Sewer Relocations Project were the installation of approximately
350 lineal feet of lO-inch diameter ductile iron pipeline, 500 lineal feet of
36-inch diameter concrete pipeline, 1,100 lineal feet of 39-inch diameter concrete
pi pel ine, and associ ated manhol es and structures. In addition, approximatel y
1,050 lineal feet of 10 to 12-inch diameter water distribution main was relocated
by EBMJD to allow for the installation of the sewer. Additional information on
the project is given on page CS-28 of the Fiscal Year 1988/1989 Capital
Improvement Budget.
On June 2, 1988, the Board authorized the General Manager-Chief Engineer to
execute a contract with Dal ton Construction Company to construct the Phase 1
I-680/SR-24 Sewer Relocations Project. Notice to Proceed was issued on August 10,
1988. The original contract completion date was December 9, 1988. The contract
completion date was revised to January 31, 1989, due to contract change orders for
extra work. However, due to problems encountered by the contractor during
construction, the completion was delayed and the pipeline was put into full
operation on April 21, 1989. The remaining contract work was substantially
compl eted on Apri 1 28, 1989. L iqui dated damages are bei ng withhel d from the
contractor. The remai ni ng work consi sts of punch 1 i st items and these do not
affect the project acceptance. A claim for changed site conditions was recently
submitted by the contractor and it is being reviewed.
The total authorized budget for the Phase 1 I-680/SR-24 Sewer Relocations Project,
including the engineering and design, consultant service, District forces, testing
services, relocation of EBMJD facilities, etc., is $1,851,000. The total
estimated expenditures are approximately $1,700,000, excluding the amount that has
been requested by the contractor in its claim of changed site conditions. All
costs incurred by the District are eligible for reimbursement by CalTrans. A
detailed accounting of the project costs will be provided to the Board at the time
of the project closeout.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the contract work for construction of the Phase 1
I-680/SR-24 Sewer Relocations Project (D.P. 4428) and authorize the filing of the
Notice of Completion.
1302A-9/65
RSK
JSM
RAB
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
.~
flfJ]
,.--,"--_.-_.- ...."-~~_._--"._-_..__._.__._------_.._-,....,-,._,.,.---'----_._---'~-,"~--.__._...-.__._---~.._....._-_.__.~.....,_.._,-----_.._---_.._~+_..._"------
.
Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary LJistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION
SUBJECT
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
Ma 4, 1989
PAGE 1 OF 4
NO.
v.
CONSENT CALENDAR 9
DATE
A r1l 24, 1989
AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 89-13 (ORINDA), P.A. 89-14
(LAFAYETTE), AND P.A. 89-15 (DANVILLE) TO BE INCLUDED
IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT
&l)BMITTED BY
uenn1s Hall
Associate Engineer
Parcel
No.
Area
89-13 I Or1 nda
I (69D1>
89-14
89-15 IDanv111e
<78E2 )
Owner, Address
Parcel No. & Acrea e
J. E. Cleymaet, etux
37 Los Altos Road
Or1nda CA 94563
263-040-003 (1.15 AC)
Pamela Heaton
c/o Jackson & Co. Realtors
1078 Carol Lane, 6201
Lafayette CA 94549
Ptn. 167-130-002
(.3 AC)
State of California
Dept. of Parks and
Recreation
POBox 942896
Sacramento CA 94296
Ptn. 194-020-01&-02
(2.02 AC)
TYPE OF ACTION
ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR
PROCESSING
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Engineering Department/
Construction Division
Remarks
I Ex1 st1 ng house - fa1l1 ng I CCCSD
I septic system. District I
to prepare "Notice of
I Exemption" I
Owner pl ans to bu1l d one I CCCSD
single family home.
District to prepare
"Notice of Exemption"
I State of Cal1forn1 a State of
intends to use this site California
as a staging area for
horseback riders. Site
I will include a ranger's
I house and a public
I restroom. "Not1 ce of
I Exemption" by State of
Cal1forn1 a. Sphere of
influence must be modified.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 89-13, 89-14, and 89-15 to be included in a future
formal annexation.
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
1302A-9/85
;do
DH
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
fir
lJ
JSM
RAB
...
"-
~';
SAN
EBMUD
PABLO RES PROP
P.A. 89-13
III
_uJ__<'"
,
.--
4
ROMAN CATHOLIC
IISHO' OF OAklAND
'04.04AC
NELSON
10. Z S AC
'7
95
\
P.A. 89.14
.us
T At
-.l1
I
_ual
I:l.OAC
1
I
.:'<-:'.."'t,~J
~".IY
.0. 0 At
.... .. At
41.,.a...c
MOUNT DIABLO STATE PARK
41111EX
. ...
:tf:t?:;:;:r;,[i,::,::,:;.:;..:~.:;.?t~.:.:.. :
A';';';'; ..._.
P.A. 89.15
.
Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary LJistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE
OF 3
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
VI.
ENGINEERING
1
SUBJECT
DATE
AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR DESIGN OF
THE I680/SR24 SEWER RELOCATIONS PHASE 2, DISTRICT
PROJECT 4654
SUBMITTED BY
Tad J. Pilecki
Associate En ineer
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT
Department
Div' .
ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to
execute a consulting engineering agreement when it is greater than $50,000.
BACKGROUND: To accommodate construction of the first unit of the 1680/SR24
Interchange Expansion, the District completed the first phase of sewer relocations
in December of 1988. In a letter dated March 31, 1989, Caltrans requested the
District to prepare detailed plans and specifications for the second phase of
sewer relocations. The second phase sewer relocations will consist of up to 11
relocations between the South Main undercrossing and the North Main overcrossing.
The I680/SR24 Interchange Expansion was the subject of a Board presentation at the
April 20, 1989 Board meeting.
Plans and specifications for the relocation are to be submitted to Caltrans for
approval by August 15, 1989. The construction of the relocations must be
completed by May 1990 to meet Caltrans' schedule requirements. To minimize the
disruptive impact on Walnut Creek residents, several District projects will be
constructed concurrent with the Caltrans relocations.
To meet the short schedule, staff proposes to retain a consulting engineering firm
to prepare the plans and technical specifications. A cost reimbursement contract
with a cost ceiling of $112,955 has been negotiated with the engineering firm of
John Carollo Engineers (JCE) of Walnut Creek. JCE was selected because of its
design experience on the Phase 1 relocations and its ability to meet Caltrans'
schedule.
Attachment 1 provides a detailed breakdown of the design budget. The predesign
level total project cost for the Phase 2 relocations is estimated to be
$1,340,000. The total project cost for all Caltrans relocations associated with
the I680/SR24 Expansion is $3,700,000. Cal trans reimburses in arrears, so the
Board must authorize funds for the project even though Caltrans will eventually
compensate the District for all costs attributable to the I680/SR24 Interchange
Expansion. The I680/SR24 Sewer Relocations Phase 2 Project is described in detail
starting on page CS-28 of the 1988-89 Capital Improvement Budget.
This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Statute 21080.21 since it
involves construction of pipelines of less than one mile in total length which
will be located in streets and easements. A Notice of Exemption will be filed
with the County Clerk.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
(()~4J
DRW
1302A-9/85
TJP
CWS
RAB
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR DESIGN OF
THE I680/SR24 SEWER RELOCATIONS PHASE 2, DISTRICT
PROJECT 4654
POSITION PAPER
PAGE 2
DATE
OF
3
Anri 1 74 laRa
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a cost
reimbursement contract with a cost ceiling of $112,955 with John Carollo Engineers
to design Phase 2 of the I680/SR24 Sewer Relocations, DP 4654.
13028-9/85
ATTACHMENT 1
I680/SR24 SEWER RELOCATIONS, PHASE 2
DESIGN BUDGET
John Carollo Engineers
Soils (Consultant)
Aerial Survey (Consultant)
Ground Survey (District Forces)
District Forces (Design) (1)
$112,955
15,000
10,000
15,000
46,405
Subtotal
199,360
Contingency ( 10%) (2)
20,640
Total Cost
S220,000
(1) District Forces will direct the consultant's work, obtain and
coordinate utility information, provide potholing and TV inspection,
prepare front end specifications, provide technical review,
coordinate aerial and geotechnical consultants, and develop planning
evaluations.
(2) If necessary, District staff will use this contingency to issue
consultant contract change orders or fund additional force account
work.
.
Centr~ Contra Costa Sanitar~ District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 2
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
VI I. COLLECTION SYSTEM 1
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE GENERAL MANAGER-OHEF ENGINEER TO EXEQJTE AN
AGREEr-ENT WITH DECKER-OVERMILLER INC. TO REA-ACE AND UPSIZE
4,200 FEET OF EXISTING SEWER AT FOUR LOCATIONS USING THE
PIPE BURSTING r-ETHOD WITH A COST CEILING OF $314,100
DATE
May 2, 1989
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE AGREEr-ENT
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
John Larson, Mana er
ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to
execute a construction contract when the amount exceeds $25,000.
BAa<GROUND: There are portions of the District's collection system that have
deteriorated to the point where replacement is necessary to prevent failure and
subsequent overflows. The 1989/90 Capi tal Improvement Budget i ncl udes funds for
replacing collection system facilities using pipe bursting (Pipe Bursting
Projects, page CS-135). Four pipe segnents total ing 4,200 feet and located in
narrow easements in residential areas with difficult access and mature landscaping
are proposed for repl acement. They are located in Ori nda, Lafayette, and Wal nut
Creek. The four pi pe segnents were selected on the basi s of condi ti on, ongoi ng
mai ntenance requi rements, dffficul ty of access for mai ntenance, and suitabil ity
for pipe bursting.
Pi pe bursti ng was sel ected for th i s work because of its unique abil ity to both
repl ace and upsize a sewer with mi nimal excavati on. The features of the pi pe
bursting method that are essential to the long term success of these replacement
proj ects are:
o Ability to accomplish the work within the existing five-foot-wide
easement so that no additional property rights are required.
o Ability to accomplish the work without disturbing the mature
landscaping and encroachments in the existing right-of-way (this
also results in lower restoration costs).
o Ability to accomplish the work with minimal excavation (both
benching and trenching) to eliminate the potential for earth
movement due to altered surface drainage and/or poor backfill
compacti on.
o Ability to accompl ish the work with minimal construction impacts
(noise, dust, traffic, damage to private property) on local
resi dents.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
SUBJECT
POSITION PAPER
AUlliORIZE GENERAL MANPGER-a-tIEF ENGINEER TO EXEUJTE AN
AGREE~NT WITH DECKER-OVERMILLER INC. TO REPLACE AND UPSIZE
4,200 FEET OF EXISTING SEWER AT FOUR LOCATIONS USING THE
PIPE BURSTING MElliOD WITH A COST CEILING OF $314,100
PAGE 2 OF 2
DATE
May 2, 1989
Staff concludes this work is exempt fran the public bidding requiranents because
there is only one source available. It is the staff's strong engineering opinion
that this project can only be successfully performed as envisioned through use of
the pipe bursting method. No traditional construction methods or alternative new
underground technologies are known to staff which can accomplish this project with
all of the major benefits provided by use of the pipe bursting technology. The
pipe bursting method is only available at this time through Oecker-Overmiller Inc.
They are the sole and only certified licensed contractor in California to utilize
and execute the PIM Corporation pipe bursting technology. PIM Corporation is the
sole licensee in North America of British Gas, plc. The method and apparatus are
covered by the following United States patents: 4,699,404; 4,720,211; and
4,738,565. No other pipe bursting method is currently available in the United
States at this time and no challenges have been made to the United States patents
held by British Gas.
A unit price contract with a cost ceiling has been negotiated with
Oecker-Overmiller Inc. The unit price varies fran site-to-site. The cost ceiling
is $314,100. The Decker-Overmiller work incl udes mobil ization/demobil ization,
bursting the existing 6-inch pipe, installation of an 8-inch polyethylene
repl acement pi pe, 1 ateral rei nstatement, and si te restorati on. The work woul d
start in early June to take advantage of the higher soil moisture and the
avail abil ity of the crews and eq ui pment. A deci si on not to proceed at th i s time
would delay the work for one year due to demand for the crews.
The total cost for this work will be $341,100. In addition to Oecker-Overmiller,
District forces would provide public contact, project management, inspection, and
other support activiti es as needed. The Oi stri ct force account cost will be
$27,000. This cost using the pipe bursting method is anticipated to be
significantly less than alternative construction methods available due to extended
costs for right-Of-way and landscape and surface restoration.
Thi s proj ect has been eval uated by staff and it has been determi ned to be exempt
fran the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA
Guidelines Section 18.3, since it involves replacement of existing sewer
facilities with negligible or no expansion of capacity. A Notice of Exemption
will be filed with the County Clerk.
RECOMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engi neer to execute an
agreement with Decker-Overmiller Inc. to replace and upsize 4,200 feet of existing
sewers at four locations with a cost ceiling of $314,100.
---------
13026-9/85
.
Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitar) Jistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 4, 1989
NO.
XI.
BUDGET AND FINANCE
1
SUBJECT
DATE
April 26, 1989
RECEIVE THE 1989-1990 EQUIPMENT BUDGET FOR REVIEW
TYPE OF ACTION
RECEIVE EQUIPMENT
BUDGET
SUBMITTED BY
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Administrative/Finance and Accounting
ISSUE: The 1989-1990 Equipment Budget is submitted for review.
BACKGROUND: The 1989-1990 Equi pment Budget is transmitted herew ith. A 1 ist of all
equipment items requested by each department, categorized by functional
classification, is supported by a descriptive sheet which provides justification for
each item. A comparative summary of the Equi pment Budget by department for the
1989-1990 and four prior fiscal years is provided. The Equipment Budget was reviewed
by the Board Capital Projects Committee on April 25, 1989, and resultant changes have
been incorporated in the attached budget document. -
The 1989-1990 Equipment Budget is submitted for initial review by the full Board at
this time, and is scheduled for approval at the next Board Meeting on May 18, 1989.
A contingency amount is provided in the Equipment Budget for unbudgeted equipment
items of $1,000 or less which require approval by the General Manager-Chief Engineer.
The $1,000 approval 1 imit for expenditures from the conti ngency account has been
unchanged during the last ten years. The application of the increase in the Consumer
Price Index during this period to the $1,000 limit would increase the approval limit
to $1,800. A change in the General Manager-Chief Engineer's approval limit to $1,800
is proposed for consideration at the May 4, 1989 Board Meeting, and for determination
at the May 18, 1989 Board Meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the 1989-1990 Equipment Budget for review, and provide
District staff with comments and guidance. Consider a change to the General
Manager-Chief Engi neer' s approval 1 imit for conti ngency account expenditures from
$1,000 to $1,800.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
~:
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
1302A-9/85 WN F