Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 02-21-80 BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI!. NB-2 2/21/80 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE February 14, 1980 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION EXECUTE "CONSENT TO EXECUTION OF DEED FOR PUBLIC ROADS" TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY - JOB 1419 PARCEL 1 RIGHT OF WAY SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering/Collection System ISSUE: Cherry Lane, a county road, is being widened 5 feet by a deed to the county. This 5-foot widening crosses an existing 20 feet wide District sewer easement. BACKGROUND: The county requires a "Consent to Execution of Deed" whenever a parcel of land is deeded to the County for public use if said parcel encroaches upon an existing easement. This is our standard "consent to execution of deed" document; the District retains prior rights. RECOMMENDATION: Approval, execute document and authorize its recording by the County. INIT T7 ~VlMC REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION e.z.~CLW I BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO'VII. NB-3 2/21/80 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer TYPE OF ACTION DATE February 14, 1980 SUBJECT AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 80-3 (ALAMO AREA) AND P.A. 80-4 (DANVILLE AREA) TO BE INCLUDED IN FORTHCOMING DISTRICT ANNExATION PROCEEDINGS SUBMI}TED BY ay S. McCoy Parcel No. Area 80-3 Alamo 80-4 Danv. Owner Address Parcel No. & Acrea e R.E. Kreutzberg 1491 Finley Lane Alamo, CA 192-030-17 .77 acres L.W. Fish 2250 Blackhawk Road Danville, CA 94526 215-060-01 21 Acres ANNEXATION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering/Collection System Remarks Lead A ency_ Existing house with failing septic tank - Owner wants to connect to public sewer - District to prepare a "Notice of Exemption" CCCSD Proposed Sub. 5555 with 24 lots (zoned R-20) the County has given conditional approval to this sub- division and the county has pre- pared a Negative Declaration County REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~~ CLW BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. OB-2 2/21/80 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE February 14, 1980 SUBJECT SELECTION OF SPECIFIC SITE FOR NEW OFFICE BUILDING TYPE OF ACTION Site Selection SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering/Collection System MWM has formulated five schemes (A through E) for locations of the new office building at the treatment plant. The schemes and impacts are included in the attached document. The decision as to which location is best is very important. The key issue to address is that the new building must fit functionally with the existing plant and future plant expansions. Considering that the area south of the present plant administration wing could be used for additional sedimentation tanks and that the new office should be close to the existing administration facilities, the conclusion reached is to rate Scheme C highest. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize MWM to proceed with schematic design drawings based on Scheme C. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON e..c:,W CL W SUMMARY OF BUILDING COSTS ($ PER SQUARE FOOT) SCHEME A B C D E BASIC BUILDING CONSTRUCTION 66 66 71 96 64 SITE PREPARATION, DEVELOPMENT AND UTILITIES 14 16 15 17 14 OVERHEAD & PROFIT 12 12 13 17 12 CONTINGENCY 9 9 10 13 9 INFLATION 20 21 22 28 20 TOTALS 121 124 131 171 119 D Central BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. OB - 1 2/21/80 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE February 15, 1980 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION PROPERTY INSURANCE PREMIUM, 1979-1980 Risk Management Program SUBMITTED BY Walter N. Funasaki INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Accounting ISSUE: The billing for the District's property insurance coverage for the period July 1, 1979 through June 30, 1980 was submitted for payment by Schroder Insurance Agency on January 25, 1980. The billed amount is $101,000 and exceeds the premium quoted in the broker's proposal by $24,134. BACKGROUND: The selection of a broker to market the insurance coverages under the District's new Risk Management Program for the July 1, 1979 through June 30, 1980 policy year was based on brokers' proposals and personal interviews with Schroder Insurance Agency and Kaine & McAuliffe. A major factor in the appointment of Schroder Insurance Agency was its markedly lower property insurance premium quotation of $76,866. Attached for your review is the Schroder Insurance Agency transmittal letter which attempts to describe the reasons for the disparity in the quoted premium and the billed amount; the following District staff comments are indexed to specific numbered paragraphs of the letter: 1. Although inquiries were made by the District regarding the delay in receiving the property insurance premium, Schroder Insurance Agency attributed the cause to errors committed by the underwriters and had never indicated that the delay was due to earthquake rate increases. A basic premise governing proposals made by brokers is their binding nature; the explosion at the Treatment Plant during the new policy year should not have necessitated a renegotiation of premiums. 2. The annual premium quoted in Schroder Insurance Agency's proposal was $76,866. This premium was confirmed by a separate letter from the broker dated May 31, 1979 after specific inquiry as to its validity. 3. The new property value of $92,501,360 was developed by Schroder Insurance Agency, based on data provided by the District, specifically for the broker's proposal. 4. Certainly, the broker's proposal should reflect rates for the policy year under consideration. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION Property Insurance Premium, 1979-1980 5. Broker's proposals are generally regarded as binding ethically, if not legally, unless changes in coverage terms occur. 6. The September 24, 1979 explosion at the Treatment Plant should not be relevant to the rates quoted in ~fuy 1979. 7. Schroder Insurance Agency has considered it necessary to forego its commission to reduce the premium from what otherwise would have been approximately $140,000. 8. As the premium billed is now comparable to the premium quoted by Kaine & McAuliffe in its broker's proposal, it seems apparent that the original quotation made by Schroder Insurance Agency was grossly in error. 9. The premium quotation in the broker's proposal was expressed as three year fixed rates which would not be adjusted annually. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the decision of the Board in its February 7, 1980 meeting, a payment to Schroder Insurance Agency for $76,866 was made with a request for clarification of the $24,134 differential. A review of the explanation to be given by Schroder Insurance Agency will require Board decision regarding payment of the differential, and consideration of changes in coverage terms and placement for 1980-1981. At the time a response is received from the Schroder Insurance Agency the staff will formulate a recommended course of action and return to the Board for specific action. (See attached letter to Schroder Insurance Agnecy). WNF: rm BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V I 1. NB - 4 2/21/80 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE Feb. 13, 1980 SUBJECT Authorization of $345 for attendance of R. Smith at a Construction Claims Seminar in Las Vegas, Nevada TYPE OF ACTION Authorization of Fundin Seminar SUBMITTED BY R. Smith INITIATING DJ::PTjDIV. Engineerlng Construction ISSUE: It would be advantageous for Claims Analyst (Mr. R. Smith) to attend a two-day Construction Claims Meeting to further enhance Claims background. BACKGROUND: District is currently involved in 1 itigation with the Contractor for the Stage SA, Phase I, Contract (Peterson-Simpson). Attendance at this seminar would increase the Claims Analyst techniques of R. Smith and benefit the District in the pending Litigation Study and Preparation. This seminar attendance would also be used for re-certification by R. Smith as a Certified Cost Engineer which is due in September 1980. Copy of Seminar Agenda is attached. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $345 in Registration Fees for R. Smith to attend a two-day Construction Claims Seminar on March 20 and 21, 1980 in Las Vegas, Nevada. R. Smith would take care of all other expenses for travel and lodging at the semi nar. ~-.:..... Engineering News.Rec~.'d ~/-::-~. - .:P . Geared to miniml chances of becoming involved in costly litigation and/or to get you out, ce you are in, without losing your shirt. Cordially Invites You To Attend Two Very Special Meetings On CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS "CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS AND DISPUTES: HOW TO PROFITABLY COMPLETE THE JOB" Holiday Inn-Mart Plaza Chicago, Illinois March 5 & 6, 1980 Aladdin Hotel Las Vegas, Nevada March 20 & 21, 1980 This course is fundamental and indispensable to the entire construction industrv. Whether or not your com. pany is involved in a claim, it will give you a basic foun- dation of everything you must know to initiate, liti. gate and complete the claim. This Conference has been a "sell-out" since its inception in 1976. The speakers and their subjects are: 1ST DAY - "THE VITAL IMPORTANCE OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AFFECTING CLAIMS" B. Warren Hart, Esq. Moore, Costello & Hart / St. Paul, Minnesota "CHANGES AND CHANGED CONDITIONS/ DELAYS, DISRUPTIONS & ACCELERATIONS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE CLAIM" Roy S. Mitchell, Esq. Lewis, Mitchell & Moore / Washington, D.C. "THE PROJECT SCHEDULE AND THE CLAIM" Thomas H. Asselin, Esq. Peterson, Young, Self & Asselin I Atlanta, Georgia 2ND DAY - "PRESENTING AND DEFENDING CLAIMS IN ARBITRATION, NEGOTIATIONS & LITIGATION" Overton A. Currie, Esq. Smith, Currie & Hancock I Atlanta, Georgia "CALCULATION AND PROOF OF DAMAGES IN CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS" Paul J. Walstad, Esq. Walstad, Kasimer, D'Ambrosio, Tansey & Ittig Washington, D.C. "ADVANCED COURSE ON CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS - HOW BEST TO PROTECT YOUR COMPANY AND AVOID COSTLY LEGAL PROBLEMS" Crystal City Marr iott Hotel Arlington, Virginia (adjacent to the Washington, D.C. National Airportl May 1 & 2, 1980 This two day meeting is a comprehensive and thorough update on claims, litigation, arbitration and settlements. Case studies will be explored and examined in depth. The speakers will probe into complex cases that have universal interest. This course is specifically for oper- ating personnel who must initiate actions or are respon- sible for notification steps, documentation, presenta- tion and litigation or arbitration of claims. Previous attendees to "Construction Claims & Disputes" or ap- pointed personnel from companies having attended "Claims" will find this course a vital complement. The speakers and their subjects are: 1ST DAY - "CLAIMS PROTECTION, RECOGNITION, NOTICE & DOCUMENTATION PROBLEMS: AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT THEM" Robert B. Flaig, Esq. Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges Los Angeles, California "USE OF SCHEDULING AND OTHER SUCCESS- FUL TECHNIQUES IN PROVING OR DEFENDING AGAINST THE CLAIM" James J. O'Brien, P.E. O'Brien Kreitzbert & Associates, Inc. Cherry Hill, New Jersey 2ND DAY - "COSTING THE CLAIM/PREPARATION OF YOUR CLAIM PRESENTATION OR DEFENSE: SUCCESSFUL CLAIM NEGOTIATION TECH- NIQUES & STRATEGIES" Paul J. Walstad, Esq. Walstad, Kasimer, D'Ambrosio, Tansey & Ittig Washington, D.C. This course will include 'round table' diSCUSSions of small, breakout groups, led by the speakers. Contrac- tors, AlE's, Owners, Attorneys, Consultants, Project Managers and all other registrants will have an unpre- cedented opportunity to "rap" with the speakers. r t make che 0: C.E. . ., P.O. ox , Greenwich, CT 06830 For instant Conference registrations call Ellen Conway at (203) 661-6101 I understand that the cost includes all formal and informal sessions, two continental breakfasts, two formal luncheons, a cash bar cocktail reception, all necessary materials and a COURSE MANUAL. FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 $345.00 per person 0 March 5 & 6 in Chicago CLAIMS & DISPUTES 0 $325.00 each for two or more 0 March 20 & 21 in Las Vegas FOR ADVANCED COURSE 0 $390.00 per person 0 May 1 & 2 in Arlington, Virginia ON CLAIMS 0 $365.00 each for two or more (Washington, D.C.) o Check enclosed 0 Bill Company for $_ 0 Bill me for $_ DPayment at door add 5% My Name Company Address_____ _ Tille City State Zip_ Also from my company Name ___________ Title_____ Name ___________ __ Title Name_ Tille ENR / January 24, 1980 83 ,- - ._-_.."._'_...__.-.._-_._..._----~._~.._~---_. .