Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/17/2003 AGENDA BACKUPCentral Contra Costa San -ary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 4.a. CONSENT CALENDAR Type of Action: ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT /APPROVE QUITCLAIM Subject: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS ACCEPTING A GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM LESLIE ANTHONY DALECIO AND FRANCES LOUISE DALECIO AND QUITCLAIM AN EASEMENT ON THE SAME LAND, DISTRICT JOB 5166 Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Ricardo Hernandez Engineering /Environmental Services Engineering Assistant REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: R. HeTrnafndez H. Thom C. Swanson A. Farrel Charles . B General Man ISSUE: Easements must be accepted or quitclaimed by the Board of Directors by resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Accept the Grant of Easement and approve the Quitclaim of Easement. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: None. BACKGROUND: As part of the Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project, the public sewer through 330 Maverick Court, Lafayette, was realigned within the same property (map attached). The realignment was needed in order to repair a portion of the sewer that was encroached upon by a corner of the existing house. The owners agreed to grant the easement at no charge to the District. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Adopt resolutions to accept the Grant of Easement from Leslie Anthony Dalecio and Frances Louise Dalecio and to quitclaim the old easement to the same; and authorize staff to record these with the Contra Costa County Recorder. U: \Position Papers \Hernandez R \DalecioGrant of Easement.doc 6/16/03 11:50 AM Page 1 of 2 CT ZM o g(O6Q C3G^ VWOO OO D U24 N 9) LOOT 23 LOOT 24 SITE r i APN ' 167 - 341-014 EXISTING 10' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED NEW 10' EASEMENT LOT 94 X 9, / 5? - rBOY—DRD L /? .LOT 13 LOCATION N.T.S. GEARY RD C)1 N x S� NG1EC0'-'ACH O o eo iso 9 FEET EXISTING EASEMENT 0 0 E NEW EASEMENT / Y Central Contra Costa Attachment N Sanitary District M 330 MAVERICK COURT, LAFAYETTE ' MAP N Z N Page 2of2 Central Contra Costa Sal..ary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 4.b. CONSENT CALENDAR Type of Action: APPROVE PROJECT subject: APPROVE COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECTS FOR CEQA/PERMITTING PURPOSES Submitted By: Initiating DeptJDiv.: Tom Godsey, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: 1 T. Godsey . ilecki W. Brennan A. Farrell Charles W. General M, ISSUE: Board approval of Collection System Projects is required prior to the filing of a Notice of Exemption under the District's California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Collection System Projects. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The total cost of these projects is anticipated to be $100,000; however, this position paper only approves the projects for CEQA/Permitting and does not award a construction contract. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of Directors may delay or decline to approve the projects. If these renovation projects and repairs are not constructed, the condition of these sewers will continue to decline and may result in structural failure. BACKGROUND: The District investigated and monitored sewer creek crossings this past winter. Several known sewer issues worsened while other new ones were discovered. Each of the sites must have a California Fish and Game Stream Alteration permit secured before construction work can be completed. Each also should be corrected before the onset of this coming winter. Attachment 1 shows the locations of the various sites. Cow Creek (DP #5672): Collection System staff discovered significant erosion and undermining of one creek crossing support structure and manhole. This repair project will restore the eroded soil and mitigate the causes of the erosion. The work would be completed under a negotiated change order as part of the Walnut Creek Renovation Project, Phase 1. Rheem Blvd. (DP #5661): Collection System staff found the concrete support for this creek crossing had deflected and fallen over. Collection System staff made an emergency repair to re -plumb the support temporarily. This project will remove and I: \Design \Position Papers\ 2003W pproveCollSysProjforCEQA- btg.DOC Page 1 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject. APPROVE COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECTS FOR CEQA/PERMITTING PURPOSES replace both creek - crossing supports and add piers to prevent further instability. The work would be completed under a negotiated change order as part of the Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project, Phase 4. St. Mary's Road Culvert (DP# 5464): This culvert carries storm water beneath our 27- inch- diameter trunk sewer as well as a 66 -inch water line and the St. Mary's trail. The culvert pipe frequently has blockages and the storm water overtops the trail thus risking washing out our trunk sewer and the water line. This project will replace existing trash racks that protect the culvert from debris buildup. The work would be completed under a negotiated change order as part of the Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project, Phase 4. Hill Road Creek Crossing Stabilization: This project will repair and protect a creek crossing where a concrete - encased pipe crossing has been damaged. This work would be completed under a negotiated change order as part of the Walnut Creek Renovations Project, Phase 1. The Board normally considers approval of a project and direction to file a Notice of Exemption at the time of award of a Construction Contract. New permitting requirements from agencies such as California Department of Fish and Game require that completed CEQA documentation be submitted with the permit application. Since this permit application process can be time consuming, Board approval of the project and direction to file a Notice of Exemption is needed at this time. These Collection System projects are included as part of the Collection System Urgent Projects Program in the Fiscal Year 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages CS -42 through CS -50. Staff has conducted a cash flow analysis of the Sewer Construction Fund and concluded that adequate funds are available for these projects. Staff has concluded that these projects are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301, since they involve only alterations of existing facilities with no expansion of capacity. Authorization of these projects will establish the Board of Directors' independent finding that these projects are exempt from CEQA. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Approve the Collection System Projects and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the Contra Costa County Clerk. I: \Design \Position Papers\2003\ApproveCollSysProjforCEQA- btg.DOC Page 2 of 3 24 JO ORINDA T SEE INSET �9 W Ot�LO s�. F i 0 v D Z �x 0 o� SITE,' �� y5 W ST MARY'S ST. Aso TRASH RACK G MORAGA ° INSET "A" RHEEM BLVD N a, a N O 0 N N.T.S. O �I Central Contra Costa Sanitary District S Prepared by Engineerinq Support So tia VAN PATTEN e�vo m INSET "B" HILL RD RD CRE INSET "C" DR COW CREEK v k0 F� C DANVILLE DIABLO RD' GREEN VALLEY RD SEE INSET B- ST VAN PATTEN SEE CHRISTOPHER DR INSET "C" DR COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECTS Page 3 of 3 Attachment 1 Central Contra Costa Sar.._ary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 4.c. CONSENT CALENDAR Type of Action: APPROVE PROJECT subject: APPROVE ST. STEPHENS SLIDE PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 5600, FOR CEQA/PERMITTING PURPOSES Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Tom Godsey, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: l T. Godsey cki W. Brennan A. Farrell ha e . Ba General Man er ISSUE: Board approval of St. Stephens Slide Project, District Project 5600, is required prior to the filing of a Notice of Exemption under the District's California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the St. Stephens Slide Project, D.P. 5600. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The total project cost is anticipated to be $150,000; however, this position paper only approves the project for CEQA/Permitting and does not award a construction contract. ALTERNATIVES/CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of Directors may delay or decline to approve the project. If this renovation project and repair is not constructed, the condition of the sewers will continue to decline and may result in structural failure. BACKGROUND: The District investigated and monitored sewer creek crossings this past winter. One known soil slide along St. Stephens Drive worsened significantly. The culvert carrying storm water from St. Stephens Drive across our sewer easement has corroded and failed, washing out a gully that imperils our sewer easement. This repair will stabilize and rebuild the soil slope, renovate the storm drain, and provide for permanent gravity sewer service. This project site must have a California Fish and Game Stream Alteration permit secured before construction work can be completed. This project should also be corrected before the onset of this coming winter. Attachment 1 shows the location of the site. The Board normally considers approval of a project and direction to file a Notice of Exemption at the time of award of a Construction Contract. New permitting requirements from agencies such as California Department of Fish and Game require hDesign \Position Papers \2003 \5600ApproveCEQA- btg.DOC Page 1 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject. APPROVE ST. STEPHENS SLIDE PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 5600, FOR CEQA/PERMITTING PURPOSES that completed CEQA documentation be submitted with the permit application. Since this permit application process can be time consuming, Board approval of the project and direction to file a Notice of Exemption is needed at this time. The St. Stephens Slide Project is included as part of the Collection System Urgent Projects Program in the Fiscal Year 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages CS -42 through CS -50. Staff has conducted a cash flow analysis of the Sewer Construction Fund and concluded that adequate funds are available for these projects. Staff has concluded that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301, since it involves only alterations of existing facilities with no expansion of capacity. Authorization of this project will establish the Board of Directors' independent finding that this project is exempt from CEQA. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Approve the St. Stephens Slide Project, D.P. 5600, and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the Contra Costa County Clerk. I: \Design \Position Papers \2003\5600ApproveCEQA- btg.DOC Page 2 of 3 N. Lb. Central Contra Costa Attachment Sanitary district ST STEPHEN SLIDE PROJECT n CCCCSD PROJECT NO. 5600 Page 3 of 3 Central Contra Costa San —iry District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 Type of Action: HUMAN RESOURCES No.: 4.d. CONSENT CALENDAR Subject: AUTHORIZE LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITHOUT PAY FOR GREGORY DeCHAMBEAUX, PLANT OPERATOR III, THROUGH APRIL 17, 2004 Submitted By: James M. Kelly Initiating DeptJDiv.: Operations Director of Operations REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: / Char es atts, General Manager ISSUE: Board of Directors' authorization is required for leave without pay in excess of 30 days. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize leave without pay for Gregory DeChambeaux, Plant Operator III, through April 17, 2004. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Minimal ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not approve the leave without pay. If however, Mr. DeChambeaux is unable to return to work, this action would prompt Mr. DeChambeaux's employment to be terminated. BACKGROUND: Gregory DeChambeaux, Plant Operator III, has been off work since April 18, 2003, in order to care for an immediate family member with a serious health condition, as defined by the Family and Medical Leave Acts. Mr. DeChambeaux applied for and was granted 12 weeks of Family Medical Leave through July 11, 2003. Mr. DeChambeaux has been in a non -paid status since approximately June 1, 2003. Mr. DeChambeaux has reported that the treating physician estimates his required time off to not exceed one year from the original date off (April 18, 2003), and he has requested a leave of absence through April 17, 2004. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize leave without pay for Gregory DeChambeaux, Plant Operator III, through April 17, 2004. H: \PP \LOAWOP G DECHAMBEAUX.doc Page 1 of 1 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 5. a. HEARINGS Type of Action: CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING subject. CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 9.08 OF THE DISTRICT CODE REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR BACKWATER OVERFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES Submitted By: Curtis Swanson Division Manager Initiating Dept. /Div.: Engineering /Environmental Services REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: 1 , , <A# K. Alm General ISSUE: The District Code requires that the Board of Directors conduct a public hearing prior to considering adoption of an ordinance to amend the Code. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on and consider adoption of a proposed ordinance to amend Chapter 9.08 of the District Code regarding requirements for Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices (see Attachment 1). Adopt the proposed ordinance. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: After conducting the public hearing, the Board can adopt or decline to adopt the proposed ordinance. BACKGROUND: Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices effectively protect homes and businesses from damage due to wastewater overflows. Over the past five years, the District has settled 75 damage claims for an approximate amount of $1.1 million as a result of wastewater overflows due to blocked District sewer mains. This amount does not include District staff costs. Since 1993, the District Code has required that these devices be installed whenever a new connection to the District's public sewer is made and whenever a side sewer is altered, extended or repaired. The proposed ordinance would amend the District Code to clarify responsibilities for location and maintenance of Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices, and would establish procedures for property owners to request exceptions to the requirements. WPosition Pape rs \Miyamoto - Mills \BOPD PP re date.doc 7/10/03 3:37 PM Page I of 51 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 Subject: CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 9.08 OF THE DISTRICT CODE REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR BACKWATER OVERFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES Specifically, the proposed amendment would make it clear that property owners are responsible to: • Install and maintain backwater overflow prevention devices on all side sewers connected to District public sewers, unless an exception is granted by the District. • Confirm that existing backwater overflow prevention devices are installed at an elevation that protects their property from damage; • Adjust the elevation of existing backwater overflow devices when improvements on the property result in the device being at an improper elevation; • Properly install a backwater overflow prevention device when making a new connection to the District's sewer system; • Properly install a backwater overflow prevention device when a repair is made to a side sewer that lacks a device; Property owners who fail to do these things would be responsible for all damage that results from missing or improperly installed backwater overflow prevention devices. A process for property owners to request exception from the requirements is also provided in the proposed Code amendment. Anyone granted an exception would assume the risk for property damage from a sewage overflow event. The exception would be recorded against the deed for the property. The public hearing was originally noticed and scheduled to be conducted on April 3, 2003. At that Board meeting, a representative from the Contra Costa Association of Realtors objected to a provision in the proposed ordinance that required an installation of a backwater overflow device upon the sale of a home or business property. The Board directed staff to review the proposed ordinance in light of the realtor's comments. From follow -up discussions with the Contra Costa Association of Realtors' representatives, staff has concluded that an original ordinance provision calling for installation of overflow devices upon the sale of a property can be held in abeyance. Instead, staff proposes to increase the awareness of overflow devices through a public UAPosition PapersWiyamoto- MillsOOM PP re date.doc 7/10/03 3:09 PM Page 2 of 51 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 suaiect: CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 9.08 OF THE DISTRICT CODE REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR BACKWATER OVERFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES outreach effort and through education efforts with local realtors, home inspection services, plumbers, and insurance companies. Staff has already included overflow device information on the District's website. Also, an article about overflow devices has appeared in the newsletter that is distributed to the District's customers. Staff will monitor the installation of overflow devices on existing properties and the level of overflow damage claims to determine if these educational outreach efforts are sufficient to reduce damage from wastewater overflows. The Contra Costa Association of Realtors has pledged to cooperate with the District to educate its members, associates, and customers about the benefits of overflow devices and responsibilities of the property owners for installing and maintaining these devices. Staff recommends that the effective date for the amended Code provisions be August 1, 2003. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on and consider adoption of a proposed ordinance to amend Chapter 9.08 of the District Code regarding requirements for Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices. Adopt the proposed ordinance. U: \Position Pape rs \Miyamoto - Mills \BOPD PP re date.doc 7/10/03 3:09 PM Page 3 of 51 Attachment 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND DISTRICT CODE CHAPTER 9.08 TO CLARIFY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BACKWATER OVERFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (District) set April 3, 2003 at 2:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to receive comments on and consider adoption of this ordinance to amend Chapter 9.08 of the District Code regarding requirements for backwater overflow prevention devices and a process for applying for exceptions to the requirements; and proper notices were posted and published in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the District; and WHEREAS, at the time and place for which notice was given, the Board of Directors opened a public hearing on the proposed ordinance and all interested parties present were given an opportunity to be heard, and thereupon, the hearing was continued to July 17, 2003; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors conducted the continued hearing on July 17, 2003 and all interested parties present were given an opportunity to be heard, and thereupon, the hearing was closed; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors duly considered all oral and documentary evidence; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best interest of the health and safety of District residents to adopt an Ordinance to amend Chapter 9.08 of the District Code regarding requirements for Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices. NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors does ordain as follows: Section 1. Section 9.08.030 of the District Code shall be amended to read as follows: 9.08.030 Purpose of Requirement of Backwater Overflow Prevention Device. When stoppages occur in sanitary sewers, there exists the potential of adverse public and private health impacts and damage to property resulting from sewage overflow and back - flooding on public and private property. It is the purpose of Section 9.08.040 to protect the health and safety of residents of the District and to minimize the possibility of damage to property by requiring the proper installation and maintenance of backwater Page 4 of 51 Ordinance No. An Ordinance to Amend the District Code Chapter 9.08 to Clarify Responsibilities for Installation and Maintenance of Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices overflow prevention devices pursuant to the directives of the District Standard Specifications. Section 2. Section 9.08.040 of the District Code shall be amended to read as follows: 9.08.040 Responsibility for Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices. All property owners shall install and maintain a backwater overflow prevention device on any side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to, the District sewer system. In this Code, the term "backwater overflow prevention device" includes both Backwater Overflow Devices and Backwater Check Valves and Shutoff Systems, and any other devices the District may approve for such purposes. All backwater overflow prevention devices shall comport with the District Standard Specifications and shall be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. 9.08.040.1 New Side Sewer Installations or Alterations or Repairs to Existing Side Sewer Installations. No person shall install, alter, or repair a side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to the District sewer system without installing a backwater overflow prevention device of the type and in the manner prescribed in the District Standard Specifications and any permit requirements as required by Title 5 of this Code except as provided for in Section 9.08.041. 9.08.040.2 Maintenance Requirements. All backwater overflow prevention devices shall comport with the District Standard Specifications and be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. All backwater overflow prevention devices shall be accessible at all times and shall be free from any obstructions, including, but not limited to, rocks, soil, vegetation, grass, trees, bushes, plants, landscaping, concrete, asphalt or other ground coverings that may impair the function of and accessibility to the devices. 9.08.040.3 Elevation Requirements. All backwater overflow prevention devices shall be installed at an elevation that protects the property from damage. It is the property owner's responsibility to either confirm that the backwater overflow prevention device is at the proper elevation, or to obtain competent assistance from a licensed plumber or contractor to confirm its proper elevation. If any subsequent modification of the property results in the backwater overflow prevention device being at an improper elevation, the property owner shall adjust the backwater overflow prevention device to the proper elevation. Should it be determined that property damage is sustained as the result of a backwater overflow prevention device located at an improper elevation, the property owner shall be responsible for any such damage. Page 5 of 51 Ordinance No. An Ordinance to Amend the District Code Chapter 9.08 to Clarify Responsibilities for Installation and Maintenance of Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices 9.08.040.4 Failure to follow the backwater protection device requirements. Any property owner whose property has no backwater overflow prevention device, or has a defective or improperly installed backwater overflow prevention device, shall be responsible for all damage that results from the lack of such a device, or the failure of the defective or improperly installed device to prevent such damage. Section 3. Section 9.08.041 shall be added to the District Code as follows: 9.08.041.1 Finding Regarding Exceptions to Requirement for Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices. The District finds, in Chapter 9.08.030, that backwater overflow prevention devices are necessary to prevent overflow and back - flooding, to protect the health and safety of District residents and to minimize the possibility of damage to property. The District also finds that some property owners may prefer to apply for an exception to the requirements herein for installing a backwater overflow prevention device, or that it may be impracticable for select residences where backwater overflow prevention devices were not installed when the residence was first built. Additionally, the District finds that failing to install a backwater overflow prevention device may pose a serious risk to the health, safety and property of District residents; hence, if a property owner chooses not to install a backwater overflow protective device the property owner should bear all liability arising from sewage overflow or back - flooding caused by the failure to install such a device. The District and its officers, agents and employees shall not be liable for any injury or death to any person or damage to any property caused by the failure of a property owner to install a backwater overflow prevention device. 9.08.041.2 Exceptions to Requirement for Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices: Waiver and Assumption of Liability. A property owner who is required to install a backwater overflow prevention device under Section 9.08.040 for a building previously connected to the District sewer system may apply for an exception to the requirements herein to install such a device. If a property owner applies for an exception pursuant to this Subsection, the exception will be either granted or denied by the District. If the exception is granted, an Agreement for Exception wherein the property owner expressly assumes the risk of all damage related to any sewage overflow or back - flooding of the subject side sewer that occurs due to the lack of such a device on the side sewer will be recorded with the Contra Costa County Recorder's Office as required below. 9.08.041.2 Procedure for Obtaining Exception. A property owner applying for an exception shall obtain and fill out an Application for Exception to the requirements regarding installation of a backwater overflow prevention device on a form acceptable to Page 6 of 51 Ordinance No. An Ordinance to Amend the District Code Chapter 9.08 to Clarify Responsibilities for Installation and Maintenance of Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices the District. The application shall describe clearly the technical, cost, practical and /or aesthetic reasons why installation of such a device is not possible or practical. The District shall review the application and grant or deny the Application. If the Exception is granted, the property owner requesting the exception shall execute a recordable Agreement for Exception acknowledging the owner's assumption of the risk and waiver of liability against the District for all overflows impacting the property for which the exception is requested. Once executed, the waiver and assumption of risk shall be recorded with the Contra Costa County Recorder's Office so as to become part of the property's chain of title. Section 4. Severability. 1. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Ordinance including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. 2. The Board of Directors hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrases are held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable. Section 5. Effective Date. Upon passage and publication of this ordinance or a summary thereof, pursuant to Health & Safety Code §§ 6490 and 6491.3, this Ordinance shall take effect on August 1, 2003. Page 7 of 51 Ordinance No. An Ordinance to Amend the District Code Chapter 9.08 to Clarify Responsibilities for Installation and Maintenance of Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: ABSTAIN: Members: President of the Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa, State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kenton L. Alm District Counsel Page 8 of 51 BACKWATER OVERFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE CORRESPONDENCE 1. Joe Bristol (letter) Roto- Rooter 2. Tom Kent 2570 Walnut Blvd., #24 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 3. Don and Trudi Copland (fax) Coldwell Banker 600 San Ramon Valley Blvd. Danville CA 94526 4. Cal Fox, GRI Broker — Manager 5. Roxi Leal Turnbloom & Associates, Inc. Realtor — Associate 6. Bill Leone Pacific Union GMAC 7. Jim Wilkinson 8. Judy Myers, CRS, GRI, LTG, SRES Broker Associate RE /MAX C. C. Connection 2950 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 140 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 -7773 9. Dean Farry The Farry Team Prudential California Realty 10. Gretchen Scheid Empire Realty Associates, Inc. 11. Gary Wuestenberg Realty World Professional Brokers 245 Riverwood Circle Martinez, CA 94553 Page 9 of 51 12. Ron Rothenberg Pacific Union Real Estate 13. Joan Carr Coldwell Banker 600 San Ramon Valley Blvd. Danville, CA 94526 14. Peter Kaufmann 15. Linda Ehrich Coldwell Banker 6 Moraga Way Orinda, CA 94563 16. Barry Wood, CRS, GRI ReMax Accord 17. David E. Schubb Security Pacific Real Estate 2 Theater Square #212 Orinda, CA 94563 18. Clark Anderson, CRS, eCertified Prudential California Realty 19. Jane Kass 20. Linda Cookson Empire Realty 21. Maria Gomez -Felix Re /Max Realty 22. Larry Schafer 23. Mary Diehl North American Title Co. North Broadway Branch, Walnut Creek 36 Lariat Court Walnut Creek, CA 94596 24. Gloria I. Vasek, GRI Keller Williams Realty 2 Page 10 of 51 25. Jo Sciarroni RE /MAX Welcome Home, Inc. 4475 Treat Blvd., Suite H Concord, CA 94521 26. Adolfo Hernandez Keller Williams Realty 27. Jorge and Isabel Vargas 28. Maureen Wilbur (fax) 13 Valley View Road Orinda, CA 94563 29. Dick Ingraham, Realtor (fax) 600 Las Lomas Way Walnut Creek, CA 94598 30. Linda Gorman (fax) Better Homes Realty 2958 -D Treat Boulevard Concord, CA 94518 31. Julia Dawson, Homeowner 101 El Monte Way Concord, CA 94519 32. George Bassett Executive Brokers sm 1160 Alpine Road Walnut Creek, CA 94596 33. Jerry Hicks 34. Chris Swim Real Estate Broker, Realtor Pacific Union Real Estate 3 Page 11 of 51 ROTO- _ ROOTER® PLUMBERS Walnut Creek, Lafayette, Orinda 925- 939 -3100 Danville, San Ramon, Blackhawk, Diablo 925 - 838 -6400 195 MASON CIRCLE - CONCORD, CA 94520 -1213 For Service or Repair Call: Oakley, Brentwood, Discover _ Byron, Bethel Island nI' L V 9t. 925 -634 -1108 1 1,1AI LU I -l—A Pinole, Hercules, Rodeo, Cr ! 14 a z�� 25- 51oa586110 II id v -- Q YAL. t. July 4, 2003 C. C. C. S. D. 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, California 94553 -4392 Attention: Curt Swanson Dear Curt: S Concord. Pleasant Hill, Martinez, Clayton, Clyde 925 - 198 -2122 Fax: 925- 198 -1852 It was nice speaking with you yesterday. It sure seems hard for me and probably you too, to get outside this office any more. Life, business and our jobs continually change for all of us. Our discussion was on the subject of backwater overflow installation upon the sale of a home. This letter may be longer than normal because I'd like to point out several things. I'm aware that we are looking at this from different points of view. Your point being to stop overflows and water damage caused from mainline stoppages. Often times we see this because we're the ones called out by the homeowner. First we determine that it's the main and then call C. C. C. S. D. However, there are many more overflows on the inside of homes that your people never see. Those overflows are caused when the homeowner's lateral is plugged and someone inside is running water at a high point (such as a kitchen sink or laundry)- -the water is seeking the low level and thus causing an overflow in a shower. Often the person inside won't notice it until they walk down the hall. Where you see very few mains in a year causing damage, we see hundreds of lateral stoppages that cause overflows inside homes. A large number of those could have been prevented with a backwater overflow. Let's look at the cost. This is a subject near to my heart because there are two ways to do things. To put it in layman's terms, there is a common sense approach or a bureaucratic approach. I don't think I have to say any more for you to know which one is the lower cost. If you want something done that'll benefit you, your best bet is to go with the common sense approach. RESIDENTIAL - MUNICIPAL - INDUSTRIAL - PLUMBING OR DRAIN CLEANING Page 12 of 51 Looking at it from that point of view, you'd only require this when a home is sold - - -and then only if there is an existing cleanout there. I looked up my cost on parts (the overflow plus some materials to adopt to the different types of cleanouts) and came up with $30 to $45 averages. Our labor charge is $116.75 per hour today. However, if I was called out to do just this, I could send out a low -level technician for $80 to $85 labor charge. At Roto- Rooter I cannot see this costing more than $125 to $150. I won't lie to you or the board by saying that if this were part of your code I wouldn't market it to the homeowner because I most certainly would. While my technician was there doing a normal cleaning job, it would be more cost effective and reduce their cost further. This would compare somewhat with the earthquake strapping on water heaters when a home sells. The law requires that an earthquake strap also be put on if we install a new heater. However, if we're working at a home lighting a pilot light, we aren't required to install one. We try to market a strap by pointing out that it's today's code (the owner may or may not choose to have it done). Now let's look at what would hold the cost down if the district would do the following: First, wave the permits - - -do what I call a drive -by inspection. By this I mean that if a homeowner or service company calls you and informs you they installed a backwater, simply drive by, take a minute to look, and be on your way. Don't play cop by saying that this cleanout doesn't meet our code today, etc., etc., etc. Be content that there is a backwater on the home. From what I've observed in the past - -one of these could save you a hundred thousand - - -in other words, use common sense and don't let your attorneys make a big deal out of it- - -give in order to get. It's no secret that in the past sometimes the ship was given away because a little salt water splashed up on deck. Let's look at the codes and costs of things other cities have done. The reason for this is that I know your board wants to watch costs and I admire and agree with them on this. I believe that Alameda and Albany have a code that when a home sells you have to perform an air test on your sewer. If it doesn't pass, you have to install a new line. You're looking at real money here. This could cost a homeowner anywhere from $4,500 to $6,000 and we're talking two cities that have sewer lines that average about 50 feet in length. In your district this would be thousands more when you look at our foothills with sewer lines that are common at 200 to 400 feet in length. Even though this would be good for my particular business, I have to say that I'd be opposed to this. I think it's an unfair cost factor for two cities to put on the homeowner (especially since they aren't spending that much to replace their old mains). Most homeowners aren't even aware that this is in their code until they go to sell their property - - -by that time they have a buyer and just want to get the deal completed. I don't care what Alameda or Albany tells you, their homeowners are not happy campers. I hear this from the Roto- Rooter owners in Oakland who do many of the replacements. Page 13 of 51 By now Curt, you're getting tired of reading but you did ask me if I knew of any other industry that I thought would approve of this. I can assure you the insurance industry would love you for this. C. C. C. S. D. is self - insured but someone there is in charge. If he /she has been following the trade journals, the reason given by many companies as to why they're pulling out of the homeowner insurance market in California has been water damage claims. I'm also given that reason for not wanting to quote my insurance. They tell me that I am in the plumbing business and they don't want our water damage liability and the possibility of a homeowner coming back with mold claims. I have water damage companies beating my door down every week attempting to get me to recommend them if we run across any water - damaged homes (which they know we do). They've been willing to give me Raider season tickets, or my employees $200 per home that they get work from. I've turned them down and haven't as yet found one I'd be willing to recommend. Theirs must be a great business with high - profits. I know where the insurance companies are coming from and I certainly see it reflected in my company's rates. They have more than doubled in the last three years and that's why I charge $116.75 per hour. In closing this book, I'd like to say three things. Give a copy of this to your board so that they'll see a different point of view. As I said before, the insurance companies would love you for doing anything that would cut down on water damage claims - - -and believe me, this would. As for myself after 39 years of seeing thousands of home with sewage run -over inside (not from mainlines as you see, but mostly from plugged laterals), I think this would be a beneficial code. In 1978 I sent a letter of recommendation to the District to have the specification -book changed to require a backwater on every home. I was turned down at that time. Jay McCoy stated that the Board's policy was not to drive the cost of homes up, even though, at that time, the cost was just a few dollars. I have to admit that I agree with that policy. I, along with most other taxpayers, want a board that watches dollars. However, a few years later they did change the spect and that's code today. There are some things that are Just worth the money, and I believe this is one of them. Sincerely, Joe Bristol Page 14 of 51 Joyce Murphy - Backwater Overflow Preventers 11.11 ----------------- From: <Tomkent24@aol.com> To: <webmail@centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 4/27/03 12:12 PM Subject: Backwater Overflow Preventers Dear Central San Reader: Just received your Spring 2003 issue of "Pipeline", In it, mention was made about the 3 April Board meeting at which revisions to the District Code on backwater overflow preventers would be considered. What transpired? My address is Tom Kent 2570 Walnut Blvd. #24 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 and my 'phone is 925-945-6388. Thanks in advance for your reply. Page I of I Page 15 of 51 Sent by: COLDWELL BANKER DANVILLE— 925 837 1619; 05/09/03 5:15PMjgL&x #781;Page 1/1 Expect MORE 600 San Ramon Valley Blvd., Danville, CA 94526 FACSIMILE COVED SHEET DATE: TO: COMPANY: FROM: PHONE: FAX.: E -MAIL: FAX: PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: COMMENTS: w 11 ®3 DON & TRUDI COPLAND 925.362.2282 925.831.3284 .com 710 .; 4 -ri/1 C ` \1Ae OF' U it 10 the so d r or the The documents 40 the Holt the 'Simile ended recipients you contain hereby notified that any d selos m, legally py ng or privileged stributronbelongs or he taking of any action entity named above. 1 You lease immediately notify us in reliance on the contents of. this faxed inforkmy telephonte to arrange f return of the origlnee document ton 'us, in error, please 16 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy From: "Cal Fox" <c @vcfox.net> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/12/03 8:43 AM I understand that The Board of Directors of the Central Sanitary District is attempting to enact an ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. This would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the already complicated and stressful home - selling process. Please understand that: Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Please don't try to make Realtors do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. Cal Fox, GRI Broker - Manager "Don't make a move without me!" 510 - 774 -5559 (Cell); 925 -962 -6145 (Direct) Visit: http: / /www.foxadvantage.com Page 17 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: Roxene Leal <roxil @turnbloom.com> To: <jmurphy @centraIsan.dst. ca. us> Date: 5/10/03 10:42 AM Subject: Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices Dear Board Of Directors: As a member of the Contra Costa Association of Realtors, I am strongly opposed to your proposal involving those of us in the Real Estate community to be burdoned with the task of regulating the installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a property changes hands due to the following reasons: *Escrow is a time - sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. *Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Thousands of homes may be too old to have the device installed without costly major work being done. *Don't try to make Real Estate Agents do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. *The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the Real Estate professional. *Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Thank you for considering my opinion on this proposition. Roxi Leal Realtor- Associate Turnbloom & Associates, Inc. Page 18 of 51 Joyce Murphy - Overflow prevention device From: William M Leone <wmleone @juno.com> To: <jmurphy @centraIsan.dst. ca. us> Date: 5/10/03 9:41 AM Subject: Overflow prevention device Board of Directors of the Central Sanitary District RE: ordinance requiring installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. Dear Board of Directors: I am strongly opposed to this ordinance and am urging you to amend the time -of -sale provision out of the ordinance. This ordinance would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the home - selling process. Please consider the following items that would impact an already complicated process. * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. I urge you to reconsider the structure of this ordinance and not burden the Real Estate community with another responsibility that is not within their range of services. Sincerely, Bill Leone Pacific Union GMAC Page 1 of 1 Page 19 of 51 Joyce Murphy - Please, no Sewer back water over flow devices! From: "Jim Wilkinson" <wilkie1020 @attbi.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/11/03 8:41 AM Subject: Please, no Sewer back water over flow devices! * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Page 1 of 1 Page 20 of 51 Message Joyce Murphy From: "Judy Myers" <judith.myers @earthlink.net> To: <jmurphy@centralsan. dst. ca. us> Date: 5/10/03 11:02 AM Page 1 of 1 I have recently become aware of a proposed ordinance being considered by the Central Sanitary District which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. This method of upgrading old plumbing would further complicate the home selling process and could create delays and increased costs to buyers and sellers. Since only a fraction of the existing homes would be forced to comply, many homeowners (and the District) would not benefit for years. A program offering all homeowners an opportunity to make improvements with incentives or rebates would be much more effective. Education, specifications and approved vendors information should be developed and available to all property owners. Homeowners and real estate professionals are not experts in your field. Finding workmen able to correctly install the devices you desire will take time and effort. Trying to do it it during the escrow process will create unnecessary hardships to buyers and sellers. Judy Judy Myers, CRS, GRI, LTG, SRES Broker Associate RE/MAX C. C. Connection 2950 Buskirk Ave. Suite 140 Walnut Creek, CA. 94597 -7773 (925) 906 -1819 Direct (800) 905 -1819 Toll Free (925) 937 -0150 Fax (925) 673 -9730 Home Fax litip://,A,NN,w.JiidvMyers.com mailto:homesaJudyandGill.com Page 21 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Unnecessary legislation Re:Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: "Dean Farry" <dean @thefarryteam.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/10/03 7:08 AM Subject: Unnecessary legislation Re:Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices This is definitely going to affect the already- strapped housing market not to mention saddling our kids and their future with more and more laws and governing legislation. Please don't make it more impossible to live here. * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Dean Farry The Farry Team http : / /www.thefarryteam.com/ Prudential California Realty 925.685.3303- office 925.368.5588 -cell Page 22 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Backup Prevention Devices From: "Gretchen Scheid" <gscheid @empirera.com> To: <imurphy @centraIsan.dst. ca. us> Date: 5/9/03 4:17 PM Subject: Backup Prevention Devices CC: <darlyne @ccarealtors.com> Dear Mr. Murphy, Your proposal to require these devices to be installed during the course of the sale of a home is an unbelievable burden on the public as well as all parties involved in a real estate sale. As you know from personal experience, escrow is a stressful time for getting disclosures, reports and mortgages; generally taking about 30 days. These days are already packed with obligations, and don't need one more. This is especially true because you would probably need additional staff just to regulate this procedure. I feel Ithat your department can find a better way to accompolish your goals and do it in a more economic way. Have you considered incentives to the public for adding these on a voluntary basis? Have you educated the public on the wisdom of adding these to their homes? Do you require all new homes to have these at the time of construction? And by the way, have you put one on your personal home? Sincerely, Gretchen Scheid Empire Realty Associates, Inc. Page 23 of 51 245 Riverwood Circle Martinez, Ca. 94553 Realty World Professional Brokers 925 - 381 -0956 Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online Page 2 of 2 Page 24 of 51 Page 1 of 2 Joyce Murphy From: "Gary Wuestenberg" <gw7677 @hotmail.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/9/03 3:34 PM CC: <darlyne @ccarealtors.com> To whom it may concern: I am writing to object to the proposed ordinance requiring homeowners to install Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. This will create a hardship for ALL homeowners, realtors, escrow officers, lenders etc. and that includes companies from other counties doing business here. It seems the only company that would benefit from this is the Central Sanitary District. This sounds a little too convenient to me and should not be allowed. Take responsibility where it is yours to take and don't pass the buck. Here are a few reasons why this is a bad idea: * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. *Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. *Don't try to make Realtors do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. *The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. *Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. As a homeowner and realtor, I strongly urge the board to re- consider this proposal, find an alternative solution and do the right thing. Thank you, Gary Wuestenberg Page 25 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Proposal Regarding Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: 'Ron Rothenberg" <Ron @TeamRothenberg.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <hheib el @central san. dst. ca. us> Date: 5/9/03 3:34 PM Subject: Proposal Regarding Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices I am writing because of my concern for the District's proposal to incorporate the installation of a backwater overflow device as a condition to the closing of escrow in residential real estate transactions. While this may seem to be a simple means for the sanitary district to resolve an alleged problem with sewer line overflow, it is neither fair to the buyers nor the sellers who are parties to an already complicated real estate transaction that is over - burdened with disclosure documents and statutory requirements that are more robust than anywhere in the country. The district's proposal is extremely problematic, inclusive, but certainly not limited to the following issues: • Escrows are extremely time- sensitive. The district's proposal would make many transactions impossible without imposing delays that could have serious economic impact to the buyer or seller. • Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. • If the devices truly need to be installed, the district should develop an incentive program for homeowners to undertake the job, don't make the private sector undertake something that is clearly the district's responsibility. • Real estate transactions are extremely complicated and involve considerable liability to the principals and brokers involved in the sale. The district's proposal would further elevate the liability of the parties in a state that is already known for its litigious business climate. • The district's proposal would require that homeowners certify the installation. Homeowners have no expertise in this area, therefore this is a ludicrous requirement. I would encourage you to reconsider the implementation of any backwater overflow device requirement so that it is not linked to the real estate transaction where it will clearly have significant, detrimental economic impact. Ron Rothenberg www.TeamRothenberg.com Pacific Union Real Estate Director, Estates Division Direct: 925.286.5530 Fax: 925.938.3918 Page 26 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: "Carr, Joan" <Joan.Carr @cbnorcal.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <hheibel @central san. dst. ca.us> Date: 5/9/03 3 :24 PM Subject: Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices I urge you not to consider "time of sale" as the trigger for the installation of such devices for the following reasons: 1) Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. 2) Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. 3) Don't try to make Realtors* do the Districts job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. 4) The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the Real Estate professional. 5) Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Regards, Joan Carr Realtor® COLDWELL BANKER 600 San Ramon Valley Blvd. Danville, Ca 94526 (925) 362 -2279 Direct/VM ioan.carracamoves.com email Visit Me At: http: / /wwwj oancarr.com Page 27 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Extra Time and Worry From: "Peter Kaufmann, Concilium" <Concilium_PK @hotmail.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/9/03 2:53 PM Subject: Extra Time and Worry I am writing this email in response to my being informed about a new law that is being proposed about by the Board of Directors of the Central Sanitary District. They are attempting to enact an ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. This would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the home - selling process. Not to mention the following facts. 1. Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction in which every minute counts. 2. The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. We are not licensed plumbers nor should we have to learn about the city's sanitary problems. 3. This proposal will add an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. This is an outrage. I can't believe that the District wants everyone to have one of these devices to relieve the District of liability for the cost of repairs to a home when the sewer backs up. What about the liability of the Realtor? I hope this email will make a difference. I am a Mortgage broker and I am responsible for making sure the loan closes on time. The sales contract is exactly that, a sales contract, and it has time limits which must be met or the contract may be canceled. Thank you for your time. -Peter Kaufmann Page 28 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Proposed Ordinance From: " Ehrich, Linda" <Linda.Ehrich @cbnorcal.com> To: "'jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us "' <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "'cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us "' <cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "'hheibel @centralsandst.ca.us "' <hheibel @centralsandst.ca.us> Date: 5/9/03 2:51 PM Subject: Proposed Ordinance To Whom I May Concern, I am emailing you to express my opposition to the proposed ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. As a realtor, I am certain that this would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the home - selling process. Surely there must be other ways to accomplish the objective. As a homeowner, I have heard nothing about these devices. Wouldn't educating homeowners of this need be a better way to achieve your goal? How about a rebate? The following are the reasons for my opposition: Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complication to a transaction Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means for buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * It is unfair to try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices and not expect the private sector to do it for them. The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. I hope that you will reconsider this proposed ordinance. Please consider the extra burden that will be placed on an already stressful process for prospective home buyers. Thank you, Linda Ehrich Coldwell Banker 5 Moraga way Orinda, CA 94563 (925) 253 -4654 Page 29 of 51 Message Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Sewer backwater overflow devices From: "Barry Wood" <bwood @dsp.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/9/03 2:47 PM Subject: Sewer backwater overflow devices CC: <darlyne @ccarealtors.com> Dear Mr. Murphy, Central Sanitary District wants everyone to have a sewer backwater overflow device to relieve the district of liability for the cost of repairs to a home when the sewer backs up. But CSD has done little to educate homeowners about the devices, where they can be purchased, who can install them, and have offered no incentives such as rebates, etc. Instead they want the Realtor community to do the job for them. The device would have to be properly installed at the correct elevation by a plumber and inspected and certified by the District before the property could be occupied by the new owners. As a member of CCAR , I am strongly opposed to this ordinance and I urge you to amend the time -of -sale provision out of the ordinance. Please consider the following: * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to all transactions. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Barry Wood, CRS, GRI", ReMax Accord 925-362-0422 bwooADdsm com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that a -mails are susceptible to change. Barry Wood/Remax Accord shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. Barry Wood/Remax Accord does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference. Page 30 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy From: "David E. Schubb" <david @schubb.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/9/031:40 PM CC: < cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, < cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "'Darlyne Houk "' <darlyne @ccarealtors.com> * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. David E. Schubb Security Pacific Real Estate 2 Theatre Square #212 Orinda, CA 94563 925.974.7672 925.940.9555 internet fax Page 31 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Backflow device resale requirements From: "Clark Anderson" <clark.anderson@pruweb.com> To: <jmurphy@centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/12/03 10:20 AM Subject: Backf low device resale requirements CC: <darlyne@ccarealtors.com> Dear Sirs: The real estate transaction is complicated and expensive enough. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Escrow is a time sensitive process. Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Clark Anderson, CR5, eCertified Prudential California Realty 925- 314 -2401 clark.anderson@pruweb.com Page 32 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Ordinance - Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: "Kass, Jane" <Jane.Kass @cbnorcal.com> To: " 'jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us'" <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/12/03 11:02 AM Subject: Ordinance - Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices CC: "' aswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us'" <aswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "'hheibel @centralsan.dst.ca.us'" <hheibel @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "'darlyne @ccarea Ito rs.com'" <darlyne @ccarealtors.com> My opposition to this ordinance is as follows: This should fall under the responsibility and liability of the District, not the Realtor. Homeowners are not qualified to certify that the devise is installed correctly or at the correct elevation. It also would add an unknown cost to Sellers and /or Buyers during this already costly and stressful time. Therefore, I oppose the enactment of this ordinance as a homeowner, tax payer and realtor in Contra Costa County. Sincerely, Jane Kass Page 33 of 51 Message Joyce Murphy - Proposed ordinance From: "Linda Cookson" <linda @lindacookson.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, < cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <hheibel @centralsan. dst. ca. us> Date: 5/13/03 9:13 AM Subject: Proposed ordinance Page 1 of 2 I am strongly opposed to the proposed ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. This would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the home - selling process for the following reasons: " Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. " Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. Don't try to make Realtors" do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. " Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Frank Cookson Partner, Empire Realty Direct Line: 925 - 217 -5029 Fax: 925 -964 -0860 www.lindacookson.com We appreciate your referrals! Page 34 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: "mariag1250" <mariagl250 @sbcglobal.net> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/13/03 9:18 AM Subject: Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices CC: <cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us> I am writing in reference to an ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. This would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the home - selling process for the following reasons.* Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction.* It would add an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Maria Gomez -Felix Re/Max Realty maria -_mariag.com www.MariaG.com The "house sold" name in real estate Page 35 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - The Board of Directors of the Central Sanitary District is attempting to From: "Larry Schafer' <homes @larryschafer.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/13/03 11:38 AM Subject: The Board of Directors of the Central Sanitary District is attempting to I understand that the Board of Directors of the Central Sanitary District is attempting to enact an ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. I am opposed to this Ordinance for several reasons. 1) Enforcement of these ordinances are usually costly, not constantly enforced, and are not clearly defined to buyers or sellers. 2) This is an item that should be addressed by the district, directly with the areas and individuals that require the upgrade. 3) This proposal tends to create unnecessary legal liabilities to anyone selling a home. Larry Schafer Page 36 of 51 Joyce Murphy - Proposal requiring installation of sewer backwater overflow prevention devices From: "Mary Diehl" <mdiehl @nat.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, < cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <hheibel @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/13/03 1:47 PM Subject: Proposal requiring installation of sewer backwater overflow prevention devices I urge each of you to seriously consider the enormous headaches, frustrations, and complications, NOT to mention potentially unnecessary legal liabilities that would ensue should this proposed ordinance be passed. As an active member in the real estate community and as a homeowner, I STRONGLY oppose this proposal for several reasons.First of all, escrow is a time - sensitive process; this proposal would add complications to the transaction causing grief and frustration to all parties involved. Ask any escrow officer in the Burlingame area where this same proposal was passed! Secondly, this would add to an unknown cost to a transaction that can already stretch the sanity level and the bank accounts of particular buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too hold to have the device installed without having major work being done. And thirdly, homeowners would be required to certify that the device be installed correctly and at the proper elevation..... most of us have no clue as to what the "correct" installation would entail, thus, this could create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional and on the homeowner. I urge you NOT to pursue this proposal for all of our sakes. Mary Diehl 36 Lariat Ct. Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 260 -8990 Licensed Real Estate Salesperson and Marketing Manager, North American Title Co. North Broadway Branch, Walnut Creek Page 1 of 1 Page 37 of 51 Joyce Murphy - RE: Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices From: "Gloria Vasek" <gvasek @gloriavasek.com> To: <gvasek(Dgloriavasek.com> Date: 5/13/03 2:52 PM Subject: RE: Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices I am Strongly oppossed to this Ordinance for the following reasons: • Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. " Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. " Don't try to make Realtors` do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. " The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. " Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Gloria I. Vasek, GRI Keller Williams Realty An Independent Member Broker Main Office (925) 934 -2900 A 154 Home Office (925) 682 -0435 Oh, by C40 w4y-2fyour kuow of,somoouo who mould apprwwo Page 1 of 2 Page 38 of 51 My- , o,- TaccO,s, plows ca11 MO witrh aaa- pamo awd Duzuhor and I wall ho A-appY 0 ,&ap 4 am. E -mail: Gvasek @GloriaVasek.com Website: www.GloriaVasek.com www.CasasBuenas.com ".7 Ywmiae .l �ciend f&t QuMance Pm a Sirnpee SaW Page 2 of 2 Page 39 of 51 From: Jo Sciarroni <jo @remax - welcomehome - ca.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, <hheibel @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/13/03 3:24PM Subject: Ordinance /Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices Dear Directors, I am a Real Estate Broker and Owner of RE /MAX Welcome Home, Inc. in Concord. It has come to my attention that an Ordinance is in the making to require Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices at the time a home is Sold. Please note that I oppose this measure as do the agents in my office and other Realtors with whom I have discussed this issue. I beleive there needs to be a focus placed on public education regarding this issue before you pass an Ordinance which may create a financial hardship on some property owners and /or their prospective Buyers. I urge you to consider your vote on this carefully and believe when you do, you will agree that education and voluntary compliance will work better than one mandated at the point of sale. The following are some points for your consideration: 1) Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. 2) Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. 3) Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. 4) Realtors should not be enlisted to do the job of the District. The District can figure out how best to encourage homeowners to install the devices, rather than the private sector. 5) The proposal may transfer to or create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. 6) Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Thank you for taking the time to read this! I'm sure when carefully rethining this issue you will come to the same conclusion as those of us who would be burdened by it - Please defeat this ordinance! Best Regards, Jo Sciarroni Broker /Owner RE /MAX Welcome Home, Inc. 4475 Treat Blvd. Suite H Concord, CA 94521 (925) 288 -8888 http: / /remax - welcomehome - ca.com Page 40 of 51 MAY -13 -2003 15:44 KEI -'-ER WILLIAMS REALTY 9259343422 P.01/01 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET FROM: 10 MAY CONCERN ADOLFO HERNANDEZ WHO I'I' FAX NUMBER: DATE: 676 -7211 May 13, 2003 COMPANY: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUTPING COVER: 1 PHONE NUMBER: SIM)ER'S REFERENCL NUMBER: aF. YOUR REP11RF.NCE NUMBER: SEWER BACKWATER OVERFLOW 0 URGENT 0 I OR REVIEW 0 PLEASL•; COMMFNT ❑ PLEASE, RFPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES /COMar:NTS: I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THIS ORDINANCE FOR THR FOLLOWING RE* ASONS: ESCROW IS A TIME SENSITIVE PROCESS. THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ADD COMPLICATIONS TO A TRANSACTION. * ADDS AN UNKNOWN COST TO A TRANSACTION THAT ALREADY STRETCHES THE MEANS OF BUYERS AND SELLERS. SOME HOMES MAY BE TOO OLD TO HAVE THE DEVICE INSTALLED WITHOUT MAJOR WORK BEING DONE. * DON'T TRY TO MAKE REALTORS* DO THE DISTRICT'S JOB. THE DISTRICT SHOULD FIGURE OUT HOW TO ENCOURAGE HOMEOWNERS TO INSTALL THE DEVICES, NOT EXPECT THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO DO IT FOR THEM. * THE PROPOSAL MAY CREATE UNNECESSARY LEGAL LIABILITIES ON THE REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONAL. * HOMEOWNERS MUST CERTIFY THAT THE DEVICE IS INSTALLED CORRECTLY AND IS AT THE CORRECT ELEVATION. MOST HOMEOWNERS DO NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO MAKE SUCH A CERTIFICATION. THANK YOU, ADOLFO HERNANDEZ ADOLFO HERNANDEZ - KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY • 3021 CITRUS CIR, "00 PHONE: (925) 934 -2900 X 154 - FAX: (925) 934 -3422 Page 41 of 51 MAY -13 -2003 15:47 KEL! -ER WILLIAMS REALTY 9259343422 P.01i01 Yo: Who it may concern From Jorge dt Isabel 'Vargas Fax: 676 -7211 Date: May 13, 2003 Phone: Pages: 1 Re: Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention a: [Click here and type name] ® Urgent © For lieview O Please CanmerR O P4W Repy ❑ Pleoes Recycle . . . . . . . . . . me owner we are opposed to the ordinance for this reasons: a time sensitive process. This proposal would add known cost to a transaction that already stretches the ea devi a led without major work being done. to make Realtors* do the District's 'ob. The District should out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not a private sector to do it for them. * proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on e rea estate professional. * H and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a nertificatinn Thank You, The Var . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TI"1 TI11 1"1 f]A Page 42 of 51 May 12, 2003 To: J. Murphy, C. Swanson and H.Heibel Regarding: The Sewer Backwater Overflow Device REGEI�i�D MAY 1 5 2003 CCCSD 8ECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT This proposed ordinance would be an expensive and cumbersome complication of the home - selling process. Ir The homeowner have not been educated about the devices, where they can be purchased, who can install them, and there are no incentives such as rebates. * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Sincerely, )� Maureen ilbur 13 Valley View Rd. Orinda, CA 94563 925- 254 -5218 Page 43 of 51 100'd V66 :60 E0 /ST/S0 8T46- 6SZ -SZ6 Angl!M uaaineW May 20 03 09:39p DICK INGRRHRM 925-- 947 0708 P.1 FAX TRANSMTTTAL From Dick & Sally Ingraham your real estate "professionals" _ 925/935 -7100 (Office) or 800/935 -8394 (Voice mail) FAX: 925/947 -0708 TO: 7� 6X; M EyvV4 E Date: 512P 163 Company: AW rrAQ-X D I'S Fax No, 4 7 � -- -77-1) No. of pages: Comments: 1?LAS£. ME' AirAc4'% rn —Lrvo ail w 'ter s�c,PtsS�o aRo�N�►tic�. CONFIDENTIALM NOTICE The documents accompanying this telecopy transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individwAl or entity namod above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this telecopy in error, please notify us immediately by telephone to arange for the retwn of the original documents to us. Page 44 of 51 May 20 03 09:39p DLGK INGRAHAM 92F- -947 0708 p.2 Dick and Sally Ingraham 600 Las Lomas Way Walnut Creek, C.A, 94598 May 20, 2003 To: J. Murphy C. Swanson H. Heibel Central Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff' Place Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Board Members; 1 am a licensed Realtor, and member of the Contra Costa Association of Realtors. Our governmental affairs officer alerted me to the proposed ordinance requiring a certification of installation of a Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Device before a home could close escrow. I'm led to believe that this proposed ordinance would encumber existing homes as well as new construction. I'm well aware of the inclination of the "social engineers" on the staff to propose such a measure, but I'm at a loss to understand how the Board could agree to this retroactive measure. There is nothing wrong with mandating this provision for new construction — other than the fact that the beaurocrats in all governmental agencies are pricing housing out of the reach of the average citizen with their incremental requirements — but to mandate the retroactive changes to existing and older homes is ludicrous. If the rest of the agencies were to follow this concept, we would wind up with a whole litany of required revisions Crum sprinkler systems to excess flow gas control valves. Nothing wrong with implementing technological advances as they become available, but I really question why you have to hit the home seller with an exorbitant fee at the time the seller is going through hell with all the paper work generated by the legal profession. if you feel so strongly that this retrofit is absolutely necessary, why not mandate that all existing homes — as well as new construction — perfonn the necessary revisions. Obviously, the answer is that you are concerned that a recall election would be mounted. So instead, you are using the "camel under the tent" strategy hoping that the outcry will be isolated only to Realtors and the minority of citizens who happen to be selling their homes. If you do approve the proposed ordinance,) think it would provide the basis for a splendid campaign issue for a candidate dedicated to unseating one of the incumbent Board members. Sincerell , Dick Ingraham CA DRE license #0103 Page 45 of 51 05/20/2003 18:02 6765408 BETTER HOMES REALTY PAGE 01/01 Board of Directors of Central Sanitary District Linda Gorman Broker /Owner CRS, RECI, GRI Re: Hearing 2:00 p.m. Thursday May 22, 2003 at 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a -transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already 'stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Page 46 of 51 2958 -D Treat Boulevard * Concord. California 94518 * Office (925) 676 -5300 * Fax (925) 676 -5408 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - FW: Regarding the ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. From: "Julia Dawson" <juldawson @firstam.com> To: <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/13/03 5:40 PM Subject: FW: Regarding the ordinance which would require installation of Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Devices before a home could be sold. Dear J. Murphy ,jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us I just reacenity heard about the propossal for the district to impose an ordinance that would require a homeowner to install Sewar Backwater Overflow prevention devices before a home can be sold. In reveiwing the home selling process and the cities in our bay area, there are so many requirements and restrictions the reading alone for a homeowner on what and how to make sure everything is done right is emense. I feel that one more costly requirement could drive home sales down and disscourage people from moving to Contra Costa County altogether. This proposal would create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional as well as may also become a homeowners insurance issue which all the Title Companies would have to get involved with. If a Homeowner must certify that the device is installed correctly and at the correct elevation, who will educate them all to do this? Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. I am also concerned that this would add an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. I worked 16 years in the Valve sales and manufacturing industry and surely there are various backflow prevention valves in large sizes to fit pipes further up the line. There are various valve manufacturers that could actually design a system to assist us with this problem. Has this been investigated? Thank you for allowing us to contact you. Julia Dawson Homeowner 1o1 El Monte Way Concord, CA 94519 juldawson(a;Rrstam. coin Page 47 of 51 Page 1 of 2 Joyce Murphy - Fw: Overflow Prevention From: "George Bassett" <bassett@execbrokers.com> To: "jmurphy" <jmurphy @oentralsan.dst.ca.us >, "hheibel" <hheibel @centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "cswanson" < cswanson@centralsan.dst.ca.us >, "Darlyne Houck" <darlyne@ccarea Ito rs.com> Date: 5/13/03 10:34 PM Subject: Fw: Overflow Prevention - - -- Original Message -- From: George Bassett To: Darlyne Houck; hheibel ; cswanson ; imur h Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 10:28 PM Subject: Overflow Prevention Dear Sir or Madam: 1 am vehemently opposed to your proposed point of sale installation of an overflow prevention device. I've practiced my trade locally for thirty years. Among many and various other positions, I served as President of the Contra Costa Association of Realtors in 1991. My career has focused on assisting clients with issues of problem resolution. Further, it has been punctuated by stints on the Board of Directors at local and state levels. It's in these venues that real issues and real solutions to real problems affecting real estate and private property rights are discussed and dealt with as they apply to home ownership. Sometimes a "solution" that seems obvious and easy creates more problems than it solves. I'd consider your proposed remedy to the "backup" issue as one that seems easy from your perspective, but is, in fact, ripe with problems. It's apparent that Central San is wrestling with an issue pertaining to potential claims of property damage as a result of sewer backups. The "solution" might be the installation of an overflow prevention device. I don't know much about your business, but if installation of this device helps with your problem I'm all for it. The issue at hand seems to be one of implementation. As a suggestion, I suspect that you'd reach a higher percentage of homeowners who'd install devices if you 1.) educated the public on the perils of NOT having the device. 2.) Offered incentives to install, 3.) Provided an "approved" list of contractors /tradesmen who would "certify" correct installation, 4) Consider not covering damage to property not equipped with the device. 1'd bet you a dollar to a doughnut that you'd have a higher percentage of compliance than in merely on relying on "resales" as the trigger mechanism. I'm not moving, but I'd be interested in protecting my property if, indeed, there's a realistic threat of property damage without the device. I'd submit to you that many property owners would retrofit voluntarily if a real benefit could be demonstrated. If a legitimate need was demonstrated, good Realtors would encourage sellers to install the device, and buyers would learn to EXPECT the device to be present on any home that they purchased much as they EXPECT a home warranty plan, a clear termite inspection report, and a strapped water heater. That's a guarantee. Your "point of sale" remedy would further complicate real estate transactions with an issue that Central San should be able to address independently. I would encourage Central San to contemplate alternatives. Furthermore, I suspect that broader and swifter compliance could be achieved through alternative means. You'll find the real estate community very willing to act in Page 48 of 51 Page 2 of 2 a cooperative manner with you and would be your ally in reaching and educating homeowners about your issue. Alternatively, that same group of civic minded professional Realtors can and will fight vigorously against any point of sale retrofit or other standard that is threatened or proposed by any entity. Let's be friends and work together for a common, acceptable solution. Please feel free to call if I can be of any assistance. I like problems. George Bassett Executive Brokers sm 1160 Alpine Rd. Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925 - 974 -1159 bassettCcDexecbrokers. com Page 49 of 51 Joyce Murphy- FW: Sewer Backwater Overflow Retrofit From: "Jerry Hicks" <jkhicks @infi.net> To: <kgrubbs @centralsan.dst. ca. us> Date: 5/13/03 6:16 PM Subject: FW: Sewer Backwater Overflow Retrofit CC: <BLowe @centralsan.dst.ca.us> - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jerry Hicks [mailto:ikhicks @ infi.netl Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 6:08 PM To: hheibel @centralsan.dst.ca.us Cc: csswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us Subject: Sewer Backwater Overflow Retrofit Harriet - I don't understand how this has come up and I have heard nothing of the retrofit requirements nor the scheduled hearing on May 22. Have I missed something or is this a change that is being done quietly without your customers knowing of it? I don't think you have covered the retrofit information in any Central San publications or newspaper articles. We need to know what the backflow device does for both the consumer and for the District, what it costs for both the device and for installation, how you are manned to handle the inspection and certification in a timely manner, and why you think that point of sale is the only and best and proper place to effect this retrofit. I also would like to know why you think the homeowner should be responsible for the cost of the retrofit, one which probably benefits the District more than the homeowner. Additionally, in the event that a home sale falls through in escrow, who then bears the cost? What if the homeowner cannot afford to pay for this retrofit? Isn't a point of sale requirement an additional taxation and how does Prop 13 affect this requirement? I think there exists too many unanswered questions to proceed, and any vote by the Board should be put off until such time as you better educate the public. If I know little about this, I'm afraid that 98% of your customers know even less. Jerry Hicks Page 1 of 1 Page 50 of 51 Page 1 of 1 Joyce Murphy - No point of sale ordinance From: "Swim, Chris" <CSwim @pacunion.com> To: "'jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us "' <jmurphy @centralsan.dst.ca.us> Date: 5/15/03 6:44 AM Subject: No point of sale ordinance CC: "' centralsan. dst. ca.us,darlyne @ccarealtors.com'" <cswanson @centralsan.dst.ca.us,hheibel> To Whom It May Concern, PLEASE reconsider your direction regarding the requirement of a Sewer Backwater Overflow Prevention Device as a point of sale requirement. This would be unfair to low income homeowners and especially to the real estate industry. The following are some important points aginst this direction: * Escrow is a time sensitive process. This proposal would add complications to a transaction. * Adds an unknown cost to a transaction that already stretches the means of buyers and sellers. Some homes may be too old to have the device installed without major work being done. * Don't try to make Realtors* do the District's job. The District should figure out how to encourage homeowners to install the devices, not expect the private sector to do it for them. * The proposal may create unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional. * Homeowners must certify that the device is installed correctly and is at the correct elevation. Most homeowners do not have the expertise to make such a certification. Please, again, think of another way to reduce your concerns over this issue. Chris Swim Real Estate Broker, Realtor Pacific Union Real Estate 925 - 253 -6213 page 51 of 51 O un Cl) ui 0 z Q 2 U • 7� 0M.- Cl) c; W (D O LO E T.- > o 60- f.-O 0 � o CL o cu O QL C) QL Co c W _r_ co ' � N O co V � (i3 O � � Q 3 O W o � > W a o O Z • • Total Cost of Overflow Claims Five Years 0rI 2 A07 Total Average Cost of Overflow Claims Five Years $70,000 -I $62,611 $60,0001 -- -- $50,000 - -- - - -- $40,000 - - - -- - - $30,000 - - -- - - - -- $20,000 - - - - $12,248 $6,015 $10,000 5, -861 - -- $o -- -- , - -��- T� 1998 -99 - 1999 -00 2000 -01 2001 -02 2002 -03 Overflow .device L Cl) O O i .V ONO L .O vi O LM CD O c� O AJ V LM u >= CU Co (1) U_ cl) w E L- m > o _0 a) _0 E > a) _N p a) U CD n O N - 0 `N C, C: -0 U 0 > cn O V c o > W •� o cn 0 cr -0 -0 >, � � '0 _ U cn cn N •co p� M C a) O O� :3 m w r— ., -2-0 6- cn 0 U U U LE a) U a) U j U� `) C cu ;,� 'V C � •� •§ o D U � OU O _0 0 oL CL co-) C: c�UO-0 � a 0 Q! 'L L Q -1-d U � �' 0 �/ cc U Q mi �CG�o00a UU LIM °U°0- wU) w LO a) O O U) O V) M CD M LO LO (C) rn�rnrn (.0 rn ° o o0.00 0 • • t • a i (1) w v w 0 W U a� -0 O U O 4- O U) O CL a� c cu c O -1--+ cu cu -4-1 ui O EF reqll U) O CL a) L a) C � U O� co 0.7 E L O M-- m cn a) cn O 0 .cn O 0 5cn r U a) -> to cn U a) _O cm 4-a a� cn > -X 0 a) E a� 0 cn U a3 _O a) Al O > O C6 to m cn 0 C L- 0 a) 0 -1--+ 0 E CD a) U a) 0 O a) O E O 4— cn O a O U X w p U) o U U U O U E C O CC5 O 4— O � � uj 0) CU V — O •— cn O > 0 •— X W Z 'L= N c: O 00 C: .� CU — M a) i— C U) E 4-a a- 0- Q a) c U Q ct J -� .O U. J -6-1 ca cu � Q - WFm -'-J N M Z i L- 0 C Z U) a .� CL C/) E W 0 W � _0 ca U) � a� 0 "_ W a� :r E -0 cn E WZ O C: to a C/) C/) x ° c ° cn ° Fm ._ o C ° 3 J W (10 �- ° •— a) >1 0 40- 0 �, U m a c- 0 CY Fm c U Cl) W 4-0 O v) - O CL Z x W I'' ....,:.;:ia ■rte • • • • • J Q Z O H Q V D W C/) W co V � o > 4-0 W D U) t.2 o ou z a� IL W � U' w W 1— CL > D 00 v • L. O U O U a� ca cn a� E cn co W L E _W -0 O n L O cn a� a) 0 C: O co CD- •— E o c: U U o a) co E O cn 0 F Cl) Q Q WZ L 0 o .o — CU a � U Cl) c� o E CAW L. 0 W LL �- Q LL 4 ° � L a) V U � L. — � o .� o > a .� W W o Q C/) _ 0H L c cu aD W oo Z J C/) C/) FL w WQ U U o > W U U z 0W • • • • • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 5.b. HEARINGS Type of Action: CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING Subject. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS; ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 4; ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH VIA DON JOSE AND NORTH JACKSON WAY PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002 -6 Submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.: Curtis Swanson, Division Manager Engineering /Environmental Services REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: �Sy anson A. Farre-ff K. Alm General Ma ISSUE: A public hearing must be conducted to consider objections and inquiries regarding the proposed assessment, the Resolution of Intention, the Engineer's Report, annexation, and any other comments regarding Via Don Jose Contractual Assessment District No. 2002 -6 (CAD No. 2002 -6). RECOMMENDATION: Conduct the public hearing and consider approval of Via Don Jose CAD 2002 -6. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The estimated total project cost is $196,120. The District has authorized up to $300,000 for CADs in 2003 -2004. To date, the Board has approved one other CAD project this fiscal year. If approved, there will be $103,880 available for other CADs. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: 1. Continue the public hearing to receive additional public comment or allow additional deliberation. 2. Withhold or delay approval of the project. BACKGROUND: A group of 16 parcel owners on Via Don Jose and North Jackson Way in Alamo have requested that the District form a contractual assessment district for the purpose of financing and constructing a public sewer system that will benefit their properties. The Via Don Jose CAD meets all of the criteria for formation of a contractual assessment district. There are 21 properties that could benefit from this U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 1 of 11 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS; ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 4; ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH VIA DON JOSE AND NORTH JACKSON WAY PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002 -6 CAD project. The Board of Directors adopted a Resolution of Intention to form a contractual assessment district on December 19, 2002. The proposed sewer includes approximately 1,125 linear feet of 8 and 10 -inch sewer main, three standard manholes that will serve the proponents' 16 existing properties, all of which have existing homes presently relying on septic tanks. A map showing the proposed boundary and the proposed sewer location is presented as Attachment A. On December 19, 2002, the Board of Directors adopted a resolution directing the preparation of a report for a Contractual Assessment District known as Via Don Jose CAD No. 2002 -6. A report has been prepared, and assessments have been estimated. (The Engineer's Report is being provided to the Board under separate cover.) On June 19, 2003, the Board of Directors set a public hearing for July 17, 2003. Since assessments are proposed to be levied on properties, the procedural requirements of Proposition 218 do apply. Compliance with these requirements has been included in the documents and actions proposed for Board consideration. In order to continue the process for Via Don Jose CAD No. 2002 -6, the following actions are necessary: Conduct a public hearing to: a. announce the tabulation of ballots submitted by owners of each affected parcel indicating approval or opposition to the proposed assessment; b. consider public testimony on the Resolution of Intention and the Engineer's Report; and C. consider public testimony related to annexation of the affected parcels to the District. 2. If, at the close of the hearing, the Board finds that protests and ballot opposition are insufficient, the following resolutions may be considered and adopted: a. Resolution overruling protests of improvement (Exhibit B). b. Resolution confirming compliance with California Constitution, Article XIID, Section 4 (Exhibit C). U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 2 of 11 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: J u ly 17, 2003 subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS; ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 4; ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH VIA DON JOSE AND NORTH JACKSON WAY PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002 -6 C. Resolution approving the Engineer's Report, assessments, and ordering improvement (Exhibit D). The hearing also serves as a public hearing for annexation purposes as required by LAFCO. An agreement between the owners and the District is needed to establish the rights and obligations of both parties. District Counsel has prepared such an agreement in which the owners agree to: • assessments being placed on their property bills; • pay the assessments; accept total responsibility for the design and construction of the sanitary sewer extension; • require the contractor who is selected by the owners to maintain certain insurance coverage • accept total responsibility for the costs associated with the sanitary sewer extension, including interest for District financing; and • have the sanitary sewer extension construction in accordance with District standards. The District will: • finance the costs of the sanitary sewer extension; • accept the work of the contractor, provided the work is done in accordance with District standards; • place assessments on owners' tax bills • record as liens on the participants' properties the obligation of each participant to pay assessments; and • be reimbursed in full by receiving payments, including interest, for the total amount financed from owners over a ten -year period. The agreement has been executed by all 16 affected parcel owners. It is appropriate, therefore, to authorize the General Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the District. U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 3 of 11 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS; ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 4; ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH VIA DON JOSE AND NORTH JACKSON WAY PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002 -6 The estimated cost of the Via Don Jose CAD No. 2002 -6 is $196,120. A summary of project costs is shown in Exhibit E. Funding for the CAD Program is included in the 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB). The District has authorized up to $300,000 for CAD projects during Fiscal Year 2003 -2004. This is the first CAD to be considered for approval in 2003 -2004. If approved, there will be $103,880 available for other CADs. Staff has concluded that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b)(3), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant adverse affect on the environment. This certainty is based on the District's past experience with numerous similar sewer construction projects, the developed nature of the project environment, and the limited service area of the project (no potential for growth inducement). Approval of the Engineer's Report will establish the Board of Director's independent finding that this project is exempt from CEQA. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: If a majority protest is not filed and if less than a majority of returned ballots from affected parcel owners oppose the assessment, staff recommends that the Board of Directors take the following actions: • Conduct a public hearing Adopt a resolution overruling protests. • Adopt a resolution confirming compliance with California Constitution, Article XIIID, Section 4. • Adopt a resolution approving the Engineer's Report, assessments, and ordering improvement. Authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with the Via Don Jose owners. U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 4 of 11 _-- - --- _-------------- - - - - -- __ - - - - -- INTERSTATE 680 DANVILLE I POTENTIAL EXISTING CAD AREA SEWER 2�\ LOCATION MAP 0 100 200 FEET * CAD PATICIPANTS selloollell, PLANNED CAD SEWER + LIKELY NON — PATICIPANTS x Central Contra Costa PROPOSED BOUNDARY Attachment Sanitary District r VIA DON JOSE CAD NO. 2002-6 A ' DISTRICT PROJECT 5691 Page 5of11 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002 -6 The Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District resolves: On July 17, 2003, the Board of Directors held a public hearing on the Resolution of Intention and the Engineer's Report on the proposed improvement in Via Don Jose Contractual Assessment District No. 2002 -6. At or before the time set for hearing, certain interested persons made or may have made protests or objections to the proposed improvement, the extent of the Contractual Assessment District, or the proposed assessment. The Board hereby overrules each of these protests, written or oral. The Board finds that the protest against the proposed improvement (including all written protests not withdrawn in writing before the conclusion of the protest hearing) is made by the owners of less than one half of the area of the land to be assessed for the improvement. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 2003, by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 6 of 11 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 4 VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002 -6 The Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District resolves: 1. The Board set 2 p.m. on July 17, 2003, at the Meeting Room of the Board of Directors, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, California, as the time and place for a public hearing pursuant to California Constitution, Article XIIID, Section 4. 2. Pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution, as amended by Proposition 218, commonly known as the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act," notice of the proposed assessment was provided to all owners of affected parcels within the District, which notice contained a ballot whereby each owner could indicate support or opposition to the proposed assessment. 3. At the time and place for which notice was given, the Board of Directors conducted a public hearing, pursuant to California Constitution, Article XIIID, Section 4, and gave every person present an opportunity to comment on and object to the amount of the proposed assessment. 4. The Board finds that less than a majority of parcel owners who returned ballots, weighted by financial obligation, opposed the proposed assessment. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July 2003, by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 7 of 11 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT VIA DON JOSE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2002-6 The Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District resolves: This Board has taken a series of actions preliminary to ordering the improvement in the Via Don Jose Contractual Assessment District No. 2002 -6, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Contra Costa County, California, and now makes the following findings and orders: 1. The Board adopted a map showing the boundaries of the land benefited by the proposed improvement. A copy of the boundary map was filed in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Contra Costa in the Book of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts. 2. The Board adopted its Resolution of Intention to order the improvement described therein under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1911, and directed Curtis W. Swanson, Environmental Services Division Manager, as the Engineer of Work for the Assessment District, to prepare the report required by Section 5989.22 of the Streets and Highways Code. The improvement is generally described as follows: Construction and installation of approximately 1,125 linear feet of sanitary sewer line, together with appurtenant work and facilities located at Via Don Jose and North Jackson Way in Alamo, California. 3. The Board called a hearing of protests on the Via Don Jose Contractual Assessment District No. 2002 -6. Notice of the hearing was given by publication, by street posting, and by mailing to affected parcel owners, all according to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1911. Affidavits of publication, posting, and mailing were filed with the Secretary of the District. 4. At the time and place for which notice was given, the Board of Directors conducted a public hearing pursuant to Section 5898.26 of the Streets and Highways Code, which included a summary of the Engineer's Report and gave every person present an opportunity to comment on and object to the proposed Contractual Assessment Program improvement and the extent of the Assessment District. 5. The Board further finds that written protests against the proposed improvement have not been made by owners representing more than one half of the area of the land to be assessed for the improvement. U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 8 of 11 6. The documents and events described in paragraphs 1 to 4, inclusive, are stated here in tabular form, with their dates and, where appropriate, their numbers. All documents are now on file with the District except as otherwise noted. 7. The Board approves the Engineer's Report and each component part of it, including each exhibit incorporated by reference in the report. 8. The Board finds that the Engineer of Work, in the Engineer's Report has fairly and properly apportioned the cost of the improvement to each parcel of land in the Assessment District in compliance with the agreement between the owners and in proportion to the special benefits derived by each parcel, in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of the improvement. The Board hereby confirms and levies each individual assessment as stated in the Engineer's Report. 9. The Board orders the improvement described in paragraph 2 and as detailed in the `s Report. 10. According to Section 10603 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Board designates the District Controller to collect and receive payment of the assessments. 11. The Board independently finds that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant adverse effect on the environment. This certainty is based on the District's past experience with numerous similar sewer construction projects, the developed nature of the project environment, and the limited service area of the project (no potential for growth inducement). U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc 6/16/03 1:58 PM Page 9 of 11 Number Document or Event Date or Action a. Resolution of Intention 12/19/02 2002 -096 b. Resolution Approving Boundary Map 12/19/02 2002 -097 c. Boundary Map Filed with County Recorder Pending Pending d. Certificate of Mailing Notice of Improvement Pending Pending e. Certificate of Posting Notice of Improvement Pending Pending f. Affidavit of Publication of Notice of Improvement Pending Pending 7. The Board approves the Engineer's Report and each component part of it, including each exhibit incorporated by reference in the report. 8. The Board finds that the Engineer of Work, in the Engineer's Report has fairly and properly apportioned the cost of the improvement to each parcel of land in the Assessment District in compliance with the agreement between the owners and in proportion to the special benefits derived by each parcel, in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of the improvement. The Board hereby confirms and levies each individual assessment as stated in the Engineer's Report. 9. The Board orders the improvement described in paragraph 2 and as detailed in the `s Report. 10. According to Section 10603 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Board designates the District Controller to collect and receive payment of the assessments. 11. The Board independently finds that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant adverse effect on the environment. This certainty is based on the District's past experience with numerous similar sewer construction projects, the developed nature of the project environment, and the limited service area of the project (no potential for growth inducement). U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc 6/16/03 1:58 PM Page 9 of 11 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July 2003, by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 10 of 11 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS VIA DON JOSE CAD NO. 2002 -6 Construction $177,000 Engineering 12,000 District Services 7,120 TOTAL $196,120 U: \CAD \Via Don Jose \PubHear.PP.doc Page 11 of 11 - - - - -- INTERSTATE 680 9 / - - - --- ---- ---- - ----- -- -- - - - -- 90 \ O LOCATION MAP N N.T.S. a NI I 1402 NORT H � I- I 1410 " + JACKSON 1411 1419 + = w 1418 1428 _ * b 1429 1439 j 9E 1438 1449 1448 - O - + I 1459 H U I 1458 Z 146 - � Q � Y � 1469 U I- " O I 1479 LLu 7) Q 'L r iE > I 1478 - 1488 c I 1489 o I � I = 1499 \1498 o I 0 0 100 200 u a n FEET DANVILLE WA y BLVD * CAD PATICIPANTS a POTENTIAL EXISTING 1111"""" PLANNED E 0 a C CAD AREA SEWER CAD SEWER -}- LIKELY NON- PATICIPANTS x Central Contra Costa PROPOSED BOUNDARY Attachment Sanitary District VIA DON JOSE ' CAD NO. 2002-6 A l DISTRICT PROJECT 5691 Via Don Jose CAD 2002 -6 • Meets CAD Formation Criteria 1. Benefits at least 5 properties 2. At least 60% developed properties 3. No more than 2 dwellings / property • 16 participants; 6 non - participants • 1,125 feet of 8 -inch sewer; 3 manholes; 1 rodding inlet • Estimated cost - $1969120 • Participant cost — $13,075 upfront or $1,760 /year 2003 -2004 CAD Budget Status C.A.D. Via Don Jose CAD 2002 -6 (Alamo) Authorized to Date Maximum CAD Authorization Available Budget for other CADs Authorization 196,120 $ 196,120 $300,000 $ 103,880 Pending CAD Projects C.A.D. La Sonoma CAD 2002 -5 (Alamo) Total Estimated Cost 65,000 $ 65,000 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 7.a. BIDS AND AWARDS Type of Action: AUTHORIZE AWARD subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO ANDES CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE 2003 CURED -IN -PLACE PIPE PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5246 Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Michael J. Penny, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: -� r M. Penny ecki B. Brennan A. Farrell General Ma ISSUE: On July 8, 2003, sealed bids were received and opened for construction of the 2003 Cured -in -Place Pipe (CIPP) Project, District Project No. 5246. The Board of Directors must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within 50 days of the bid opening. Authorization of the Board of Directors is required in an amount greater than $50,000. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a construction contract. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $381,618 including bid price, contingency, and construction management. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Reject all bids. BACKGROUND: The District investigated corrosion of large and medium diameter reinforced concrete pipe using CCTV inspection over the past few years. In several reaches of pipe, it is clear that some remedial action is needed. The sewer in Bancroft Road shows severe corrosion with exposed circumferential rebar. Approximately 570 feet of cured -in -place pipe will be installed inside the existing 30 -inch sewer on Bancroft Road in Walnut Creek. The District's collection system has several segments requiring maintenance, due to root intrusion and cracks. Many of the problem sewers are located in busy streets and in easements. The District has previously used the cured -in -place method to rehabilitate sewers with roots and structural problems. This method is less disruptive than open cut and is useful in easements, busy streets, and areas with limited accessibility where there is no capacity issue. Approximately 700 feet of cured -in -place pipe will be installed inside the existing 8 -inch diameter sewer on Moraga Way in Orinda by the 2003 CIPP Project (see Attachment 1). Page 1 of 5 P: \PUBLIC \Capital Projects\2003 CIPP \5246 Award PP.doc POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject. AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO ANDES CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE 2003 CURED -IN -PLACE PIPE PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5246 Plans and specifications for the project were prepared by District staff. The engineer's estimate for the construction of the 2003 CIPP Project was $270,000. The project was advertised on June 17 and 23, 2003. Two sealed bids ranging from $270,000 to $287,159 were received and publicly opened on July 8, 2003. A summary of bids received is shown in Attachment 2. The Capital Projects Division staff conducted a technical and commercial evaluation of these bids and has determined that Andes Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder with a bid amount of $270,000. Andes Construction bid had a non - material clerical error in its bid submittal which was waived by District Staff on advice of Counsel. District staff will perform construction contract administration, inspection, survey, office engineering, and shop drawing review. The funds required to complete this project as shown in Attachment 3 are $311,618. The total cost of the 2003 CIPP Project is anticipated to be $381,618. Construction of the 2003 CIPP Project is included as part of the Concrete Corrosion Renovation project in the fiscal year 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages CS -16 through CS -21 and the Cured -In -Place Pipe (CIPP) project in the fiscal year 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages CS -22 through CS -24. Staff has conducted a cash flow analysis of the Sewer Construction Fund and concluded that adequate funds are available for this project. On June 19, 2003, the Board approved the 2003 Cured -in -Place Pipe project for CEQA/Permitting purposes. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize award of a construction contract in the amount of $270,000 for construction of the 2003 Cured -in -Place Pipe Project, District Project No. 5246, to Andes Construction, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder. R PUBLIC \Capital Projects\2003 CIPP \5246 Award PP.doc Page 2 of 5 AYE PLEASANT HILL aAYM I680 NSET '13' C' INSET 'B' T CREEK WALNUT t CREEK LAFAYETTE R .avf ibiftii RLVD SEE INSET 'A' wy MORAGA INSET 'A' N.T.S. o LEGEND: SITE LOCATION U, BLVD ALAMO FD Central Contra Costa Attachment Sanitary District 2003 CIPP PROJECT CCCSD PROJECT NO.5246 Page 3 of 5 ATTACHMENT 2 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District SUMMARY OF BIDS PROJECT NO. 5246, 2003 Cured -in -Place Pipe DATE: July 8, 2003 LOCATION: Martinez, California ENGINEER EST.: $270,000 NUMBER BIDDER (Name & Address) BID PRICE Andes Construction, Inc. 1 5305 E. 12th Street $270,000 Oakland, CA 94601 Insituform Technologies, Inc. 2 702 Spirit 40 Park Drive $287,159 Chesterfield, MO 63005 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BIDS OPENED BY: /s/ Joyce E. Murphy P: \PUBLIC \Capital Projects \2003 CIPP \5246 Award PP.doc DATE: JULY 8, 3002 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 Page 4 of 5 ATTACHMENT 3 2003 CURED -IN -PLACE PIPE DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5246 POST- BID/PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE Page 5 of 5 R PUBLIC \Capital Projects \2003 CIPP \5246 Award PP.doc PERCENT OF ESTIMATED ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 1 a. Construction Contract $270,000 b. Contingency @ 15 percent $40,500 c. Permit Inspection Fees $20,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL: $330,500 100.0 2 Construction Management District Forces - Construction Management $5,000 - Contract Administration /Inspection $15,000 - Office Engineering Services $5,000 - Record Drawings $2,000 - Community Relations $5,000 - Surveying $2,000 - Collection System Operations $2,000 - Material Testing $2,000 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: $38,000 11.5 3 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE COST (1 +2): $368,500 111.5 4 TOTAL PRE -BID EXPENDITURES: $13,118 4.0 5 TOTAL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT COSTS: $51,118 15.5 6 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST (3 +4): $381,618 115.5 7 Funds Allocated to Date $70,000 8 Additional Allocation Required to Complete Project $311,618 Page 5 of 5 R PUBLIC \Capital Projects \2003 CIPP \5246 Award PP.doc Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 NO.:7.b. BIDS AND AWARDS Type of Action: AUTHORIZE AWARD subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO CALIFORNIA TRENCHLESS, INC., FOR THE CONTRA COSTA BOULEVARD SLIP LINE PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5678 Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Michael J. Penny, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: eo . A (hA- M. Penny V640ffekki B. Brennan XFarrell General ISSUE: On July 8, 2003, sealed bids were received and opened for construction of the Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line Project, District Project No. 5678. The Board of Directors must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within 50 days of the bid opening. Authorization of the Board of Directors is required in an amount greater than $50,000. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a construction contract. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $347,267 including bid price, contingency, and construction management. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Reject all bids. BACKGROUND: Planning conducted initial Corrosion Study TV inspection work on unlined concrete sewers between January 2001 and February 2002. Of the sewers TV'd, the 36 -inch Contra Costa Boulevard (CC Blvd.) sewer was identified as needing additional TV work due to severe corrosion, including exposed rebar, being found. Additional portions of the sewers were TV'd in July 2002. In September 2002 physical inspections were conducted at several locations on the CC Blvd. line. On the night of Sept. 17, morning of Sept. 18, 2002, the CC Blvd. sewer was physically inspected and probed at five locations by Villalobos and Associates (V &A) with District personnel present. The physical inspections found that the actual severity of corrosion is greater than the TV inspections indicate. In many locations along CC Blvd. the concrete is soft with most of the cement around the aggregate gone. Even the pipe that appears to be in good shape on the TV tapes has preliminary evidence of corrosion attack. The heaviest corrosion on the CC Blvd. sewer is from north of Viking Drive to north of Golf Club Road. The Contra Costa Page 1 of 5 P: \PUBLIC \Capital Projects= Blvd Slip Line \5678 Award PP.doc POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 Subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO CALIFORNIA TRENCHLESS, INC., FOR THE CONTRA COSTA BOULEVARD SLIP LINE PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5678 Boulevard Slip Line Project will install approximately 1500 feet of 30 -inch segmental slip liner in this reach (see Attachment 1). District staff prepared the plans and specifications for the Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line Project. The engineer's estimate for the construction of the project was $450,000. The project was advertised on June 17 and 23, 2003. Three sealed bids ranging from $259,948 to $565,000 were received and publicly opened on July 8, 2003. A summary of bids received is shown in Attachment 2. The Capital Projects Division staff conducted a technical and commercial evaluation of these bids and has determined that California Trenchless, Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder with a bid amount of $259,948. District staff will perform construction contract administration, inspection, survey, office engineering, and shop drawing review. The funds required to complete this project as shown in Attachment 3 are $322,267. The total cost of the Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line Project is anticipated to be $347,267. Construction of the Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line Project is included as part of the Concrete Corrosion Renovation project in the fiscal year 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages CS -16 through CS -21. Staff has conducted a cash flow analysis of the Sewer Construction Fund and concluded that adequate funds are available for this project. On June 19, 2003, the Board approved the Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line Project for CEQA/Permitting purposes. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize award of a construction contract in the amount of $259,948 for construction of the Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line Project, District Project No. 5678, to California Trenchless, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder. P:\PUBLIC\Capital Projects= Blvd Slip Line \5678 Award PP.doc Page 2 of 5 LEGEND: � SITE LOCATION Central Contra Costa Attachment Sanitary District CONTRA COSTA BLVD SLIP LINE PROJECT ' CCCSD PROJECT NO.5678 1 7 Page 3 of 5 ATTACHMENT 2 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District SUMMARY OF BIDS PROJECT NO. 5678, Contra Costa Boulevard Slip Line DATE: July 8, 2003 LOCATION: Martinez, California ENGINEER EST.: $450,000 NUMBER BIDDER (Name & Address) BID PRICE California Trenchless, Inc. 1 2283 Dunn Rd. $259,948 Hayward, CA 94545 Stacey and Witbeck/Ebert, A Joint Venture 2 1320 Harbor Bay Parkway, Suite 240 $280,000 Alameda, CA 94502 D'arcy & Harty Construction, Inc. 3 1300 Carroll Avenue $282,948 San Francisco, CA 94124 McGuire and Hester 4 9009 Railroad Avenue $311,650 Oakland, CA 94603 K. J. Woods Construction, Inc. 5 2625 Judah St., No. 2 $344,000 San Francisco, CA 94122 Andes Construction, Inc. 6 5305 E. 12th Street $379,084 Oakland, CA 94601 McNamara & Smallman Construction Inc. 7 1756 Holmes Street $565,000 Livermore, CA 94550 8 BIDS OPENED BY: /s/ Joyce E. Murphy DATE: July 8, 3002 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 Page 4 of 5 R PUBLIC \Capital Projects \CC Blvd Slip Line \5678 Award PP.doc ATTACHMENT 3 CONTRA COSTA BOULEVARD SLIP LINE DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5678 POST- BID /PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE Page 5 of 5 R PUBLIC \Capital Projects= Blvd Slip Line \5678 Award PP.doc PERCENT OF ESTIMATED ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 1 a. Construction Contract $259,948 b. Contingency @ 15 percent $38,992 c. Permit Inspection Fees $1,003 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL: $299,943 100.0 2 Construction Management District Forces - Construction Management $5,000 - Contract Administration /Inspection $15,000 - Office Engineering Services $5,000 - Record Drawings $2,000 - Community Relations $2,000 - Surveying $2,000 - Collection System Operations $2,000 - Material Testing $3,000 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: $36,000 12.0 3 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE COST (1 +2): $335,943 112.0 4 TOTAL PRE -BID EXPENDITURES: $11,324 3.8 5 TOTAL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT COSTS: $47,324 15.8 6 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST (3 +4): $347,267 115.8 7 Funds Allocated to Date $25,000 8 Additional Allocation Required to Complete Project $322,267 Page 5 of 5 R PUBLIC \Capital Projects= Blvd Slip Line \5678 Award PP.doc Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 No.: 7.c. BIDS AND AWARDS Type of Action: GRANT BID RELIEF /AUTHORIZE AWARD Subject: GRANT BID RELIEF TO N. V. HEATHORN AND AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KAWEAH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TREATMENT PLANT PROTECTIVE COATING AND PIPE REHABILITATION, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7212 Submitted By: Initiating Dept/Div.: Gary E. Rathunde, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: f)—rT- W6 w +6ath�u�,de B. Than B. Brennan A. Farrell Charl B, General Man. ISSUE: On June 17, 2003, sealed bids were received and opened for the Treatment Plant Protective Coating and Pipe Rehabilitation, District Project No. 7212. On June 17, 2003, N.V. Heathorn asked for bid relief. The Board of Directors must determine whether to grant relief of bid and make a determination whether to award the contract to the second lowest bidder within 50 days of the bid opening. RECOMMENDATION: Grant bid relief to N.V. Heathorn and authorize award of a construction contract to Kaweah Construction Company. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $891,000 including bid price, contingency, and construction management. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Alternatives include (1) reject the request for relief of bid and award a construction contract to N.V. Heathorn, (2) grant relief of bid request from N.V. Heathorn and award a construction contract to Kaweah Construction Company, or (3) reject all bids. BACKGROUND: The original treatment plant was built in the late 1940s. Since then, there have been multiple additions and expansions, such as that in the late 70s. Much of the process infrastructure is over 28 years old. Unfortunately, limited coating or repainting has occurred over the lifetime of the treatment plant. Prior to this project, coating of equipment would sometimes be incorporated into projects being completed, but it was not always provided. Due to corrosion of the facilities, proper coating and protection is needed to reduce deterioration. The purpose of this project is to extend the useful life and minimize corrosion of select treatment plant equipment, piping, and surfaces through the application of coatings within four general areas: Clarifiers, Aeration Tanks, Odor Control Area adjacent to the Solids Conditioning Building, and the Sludge Storage Tanks. Coating will be applied to concrete UPosition Papers \Rathunde \7212 BidRelief&Award.DOC Page 1 of 7 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject. GRANT BID RELIEF TO N. V. HEATHORN AND AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KAWEAH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TREATMENT PLANT PROTECTIVE COATING AND PIPE REHABILITATION, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7212 surfaces, piping, conduits, walkways, submerged metal, equipment, and a storage tank. In addition, two aeration headers will be tape wrapped to extend the useful life of the piping. This project is a part of the long -term protective coating program for the treatment plant. Attachment 1 shows the location of this project work. Plans and specifications for this project were produced by District staff. The engineering estimate for construction is $325,000. The project was advertised on May 23 and 28, 2003. Four (4) bids ranging from $433,682 to $724,136 were received and publicly opened on June 17, 2003. A summary of these bids is shown on Attachment 2. The apparent low bid is from N.V. Heathorn in the amount of $433,682. On the afternoon of June 17, 2003, a representative of N.V. Heathorn telephoned District staff to advise that N.V. Heathorn had made a clerical error in preparing its bid. On June 18, 2003, within five (5) days of the bid opening, District staff received a letter from N.V. Heathorn providing explanation regarding the inadvertent clerical error with respect to its bid and requested that it be withdrawn (Attachment 3). The letter explained that N.V. Heathorn inadvertently summed up the prices for bid items numbered 6 through 8 on page 2 of the Bid Forms and entered that value for the Total Bid Price at the bottom of the sheet. The Total Bid Price should have included the prices of bid items numbered 1 through 5 from the previous sheet plus items 6 through 8 on the second sheet. The omission of bid items 1 through 5 from the Total Bid amount resulted in an error of $448,564 on a $433,682 project. Under California Public Contract Code Section 5103, a bidder may request relief of bid within five (5) calendar days of bid opening in the event of a clerical or arithmetical error in preparing the bid proposal. The law is stringent with regard to relief from bids and allows relief to be granted by the awarding authority only under specific circumstances. Specifically, the law states that: "The bidder shall establish to the satisfaction of the court that: a. A mistake was made. b. He or she gave the public entity written notice within five (5) days after the opening of the bids of the mistake, specifying in the notice in detail how the mistake occurred. C. The mistake made the bid materially different than he or she intended it to be. d. The mistake was made in filling out the bid, and not due to error in judgment or to carelessness in inspecting the site of the work, or in reading the plans or specifications." L: \Position Papers\Rathunde \7212 BidRelieMAward.DOC Page 2 of 7 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject: GRANT BID RELIEF TO N. V. HEATHORN AND AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KAWEAH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TREATMENT PLANT PROTECTIVE COATING AND PIPE REHABILITATION, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7212 Under the above Public Contract Code, it appears to staff that the error, as explained by N.V. Heathorn, is a clerical error, and that relief may be granted to N.V. Heathorn. The Board must evaluate the facts submitted and determine whether there is an adequate basis to grant N.V. Heathorn relief from its bid due to a clerical error. Staff conducted a commercial and technical evaluation of these bids and has determined that, in the event that N.V. Heathorn is granted relief from its bid, the second low bidder Kaweah Construction Company is the lowest responsible bidder with a bid amount of $660,765. The higher- than - expected bid prices for the project are primarily due to the following factors: (1) price quotations received from painting contractors during the design phase did not require the same level of surface preparation that was later determined to be necessary and required under the final Contract Documents, and (2) the engineer's estimate overlooked the costs for installing anodes on the three clarifiers that were added to the project later in design. District staff will perform construction management and inspection and construction contract administration. However, staff recommends that additional technical inspection of the surface preparation and coating application be conducted by KTA Tator, Inc. The allocation of funds required to complete this project, as shown in Attachment 4, is $891,000. The Treatment Plant Protective Coating and Pipe Rehabilitation Project is included in the Fiscal Year 2003 -2004 Capital Improvement Budget on pages TP -83 through TP -84. Staff has determined that there are adequate funds in the Capital Improvement Budget and Plan for this project. Staff has concluded that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301, since it involves repairs to an existing sewage facility with no increase in capacity. Approval of this award establishes the Board of Directors' independent finding that this project is exempt from CEQA. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Staff recommends for the Board's approval the following: Consider and grant bid relief to N.V. Heathorn, and direct staff to return N.V. Heathorn's bid bond; 2. Authorize award of a construction contract in the amount of $660,765 for the Treatment Plant Protective Coating and Pipe Rehabilitation, DP 7212, to Kaweah Construction Company the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. LAPosition Papers \Rathunde \7212 BidRelieMAward.DOC Page 3 of 7 0 0 150 300 a=Er w / AREA / e / CY AREA 4 — SLUDGE STORAGE TANKS i. Central Contra Costa TREATMENT PLANT PROTECTIVE COATING Attachment Sanitary District AND PIPE REHABILITATION PROJECT District Project 7212 1 ' Project Location Or Page 4 of 7 ATTACHMENT 2 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT SUMMARY OF BIDS PROJECT NO.: 7212 DATE: JUNE 17, 2003 PROJECT NAME: TREATMENT PLANT PROTECTIVE COATINGS AND PIPE REHABILITATION LOCATION: MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA ENGINEER EST.: $325,000 No BIDDER BID PRICE Name & address 1 N. V. Heathorn $433 (1) 1155 Beecher Street $882,246 San Leandro, CA 94577 2 Kaweah Construction Co. $660,661 (2) PO Box 4378 $660,765 Fresno, CA 93744 3 D W Nicholson Corp. $705,400 24747 Clawiter Road Hayw ard, CA 94550 4 GSE Construction $724,136 1020 Shannon Court Livermore, CA 94550 (1) The apparent low bid price was $433,682. However, after review of the Bid Forms it was discovered that N. V. Heathorn had a clerical error and they subsequently withdrew their bid. Their corrected bid price was $882,246. (2) The final total bid price for Kaweah Construction had neglected to add $114 that was included in their price for Bid Item 7. The corrected Total Bid amount is $660,765. BIDS OPENED BY /s/ Randall Musgraves DATE June 17, 2003 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 LAPosition Papers \Rathunde \7212 BidRelieMAward.DOC Page 5 of 7 JVII 1V GVVJ 1'Y•11 I1\ II. V.I ILI" MECHANICAL C NTRACTORt3 June 18, 2003 JJVJJ°1 IV 17GJV /VIG11 r. VL /V1 l.\Lti_Iy;`,��� ATTACHMENT 3 1 l N.V. I dEATHORN, INC. CONTRACTORS UCENSE NO. 95036 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Fax: (925) 676 -7211 Attn: Joyce Murphy, District Secretary Re: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District - Treatment Plant Protective Coating And Pipe Rehabilitation Project - Project No. 7212 June 17, 2003 @ 2:00pm - Martinez Subj: Notification in Bid Error Ms. Joyce Murphy, We have discovered an error in our bid submission for the referenced project. We made a mathematical error in t e breakdown of bid Items required by the bid form. Our price for the referenced projef t is $ 882,246.00. The total price on page 2 was the total of bid item 6 though 8 only, nffi I through 8 as 'stated on the bid form. In conformance. to P lic Contract Code, we hereby withdrawal our bid for the referenced oroiectAgir reason of mathematical error. Sincerely, N.V. Heat Edward Presider ProtectiveCoating &PlpeRehobWlthdrowal 1 155 Beecher Street - Son Leandro, CA 94577 - )510) 569 -9100 - Fox: (5 10) 569 -9106 www.nvheathorn.com Page 6 of 7 ATTACHMENT 4 TP PROTECTIVE COATING AND PIPE REHABILITATION - DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7212 POST - BID / PRE - CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE L:\ PositionPapers \Rathunde \7212_Attach4 Page 7 of 7 Percent of Estimated No. Item Description Amount Construction Cost 1 CONSTRUCTION a. Construction Contract $660,765 b. Contingency at 15% $99,235 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $760,000 100% 2 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT a. District Forces - Construction Management/ Resident Engineering /Construction Inspection $96,000 - Project Engineering /Operations Department $10,000 SUBTOTAL $106,000 14% b. Consultants - Hazardous Materials Abatement Services & Inspection $15,000 - Material and Construction Testing $5,000 SUBTOTAL $20,000 3% TOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT $126,000 17% 3 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE COST ( =No. 1 + No. 2) $886,000 117% 4 TOTAL PREBID EXPENDITURES $30,000 4% 5 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT COST ( =No. 2 + No. 4) $156,000 21% 6 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST ( =No. 3 + No. 4) $916,000 121% 7 FUNDS AUTHORIZED TO DATE $25,000 8 ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION NEEDED TO COMPLETE PROJECT $891,000 L:\ PositionPapers \Rathunde \7212_Attach4 Page 7 of 7 (7-N 0 CD n yJ 0 MN 0 CL CD CL -a, c� cQ -v 0 CD CD 0 0 c� 0 rn z�• cD m CL • O Ma 3 mo MT o, CD 0 rMIN Ci 0 mo 0 m c� C. r. 0 CD 0 CD m CD 13 0 cD 3 CD �. n 0 W rn x CD CL c CD r CD 0 v vA' CD D CA • 0 CD 0 CD 0 ■ CD m MN O %�■ CD 0 FMP W--� m m • • o Cn (D Z3 �. tD (D N Cn n m I CD n cD • • • • • O :. CD O 0 m 0 0 M 0 � o cn O D � �. O �+ 0 _. CD C O (D rm4: CD c 0 cn _ � Z M cn CD 0 CL (.0 n 2) O CD 00 � � n N 2) n CD cD WN m MN O CD n ui n 0 cD -ak T su FD (D m 0 a 1 in I It i'I Y IL .� ®r 19-1 w WIN cn O I I I L I 11"I kY it 17-T H O ft H O 4 l t i rk� 3` a j �v P I us 'r3 i I CD Iy� O CD - 7--e- F•0 On ruL 0 MN 0 0 0 I J' rtir O rML 0 MN C) O 0 n CD ca O m MN 1 ^a'q Sri. y` ni i no A.- 1 V 0 CD 3 m 0 w 0 0� 0 CL CD co N 1 rF CD 13 0 ✓^ n 0 �.l.i CD roo CD r� ...i 0 1 CD 0 CD V+ 0 CD 3 0 C AD 2) CL i.i. CD 3. 0 T r. 0 CD CD 13 rF I^ Cf) i.� 0 rF m m 0 0 m ACL A • ^Z A 0 I AS, V+ rf 0 MN F 0 0.0 0 CD 0 rF m rF CD 0 O n O N • • • • • rn v z cn _. rn CD n Z . _ 0 V n Cl) 0 S 0 0 _ , 0 0 0 n CD wo 0■ ■ W ow-4 "w-4 a) N ■_ 0 a) W Ul J�b al 0 W "■� -Plk w-4 0 O 0 Cal N CL _ �F CL s� • �D N r* U) s� CD 0 O MMI r. 0 O n O 3 • 13 r. O M, N m CD 0 O m �. 0 rMI. 0 rmqm O C O 0 (D cD CL rmfm (D O MMI, a� cn n O 13 (D O 0 • m CD O n CD B CD m rmqw O h U) a) 0 n O CL (D • I 13 0 rmqm O O tQ n O cQ 9 2) N 2) MN CL O N m sv �� CD 3 O 2) LJ v CQ (D (D O U) n .o cD 0 3 CL cn ti 0 3 3 CL 2) o' N O N O WN r 0 rn N 3 2) FE* m T 9 O CD O S (D -i _. � n� _. O cD 230 o �O 0 -0 (ID N o z cD CD 0X r,#, roin C Cn (D (D n� O cD 2 CQ � N CL r O m i m m MN O %�■ CD 0 U) y 0 0 WIN 0 rTl N O O W C� CD A7 O y y m b x m z d m CD ME CD 1. CD t) ("D r) CD CD O O O CD CA CD O cr �j Mi l 1 r--r- O �Y Kit ...........' O :jK ! A it x � ,a r i s ,+ t H CD CD N O cn CD CL cn 0 12; 0 \ 1 0 CD 0 CD CD W 0 CD N O O W 0 dd 0 0 C/1 N CD CD y 0 �C u a O C O C O C CD CD F1 LOW CD CD 0 0 CD O O CD C7 y CD CD CD cn /1 1 ,� , O l Q � � A� � � � i--� � � CD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 NO.: 9. a. HUMAN RESOURCES Type of Action: Adopt Memorandum of Understanding subject: ADOPT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND THE MANAGEMENT GROUP EFFECTIVE APRIL 18, 2003 THROUGH APRIL 17, 2009 Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: General ISSUE: Board representatives and representatives of the Management Group have tentatively agreed to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Final approval of the MOU by the Board of Directors is now appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the MOU with the Management Group effective April 18, 2003 through April 17, 2009. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost of additional salary and benefit adjustments for negotiated changes in the first year of the agreement is approximately $87,312. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Based on Board direction in closed session at its meeting of June 19, 2003, no further alternatives are presented. BACKGROUND: The District's current MOU with the Management Group expired on April 17, 2003. In light of the many uncertainties surrounding the District's economic situation and the possible loss of ad valorem tax, the Board of Directors requested that the Management Group extend its MOU. In a spirit of cooperation, the Management Group agreed to the Board's request in a letter dated April 3, 2003, and negotiations were held in abeyance until negotiations with the Management Support/Confidential Group were concluded. Board representatives and the Management Group representatives met and conferred on April 29, 2003 and May 9, 2003 to discuss changes to the expiring agreement. Tentative agreement was reached on May 9, 2003, and a position paper was presented for the Board's consideration at the June 5, 2003 Board Meeting. At the Board's direction, an additional meeting was held on June 12 for further discussion of the term of the proposed MOU. At that time, the Management Group agreed to a six -year MOU in place of the three -year MOU that was part of the original tentative agreement between the District and the Management Group. KWanagement Negotiations\managementmou .pp.2003.doc 7/9/03 Page 1 of 2 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2003 subject: ADOPT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND THE MANAGEMENT GROUP EFFECTIVE APRIL 18, 2003 THROUGH APRIL 17, 2009 The proposed Management compensation package parallels the MOU previously adopted by the Board for the Management Support/Confidential Group (MS /CG). Highlights of the MOU are as follows: • Wages: First year: 4 %; Years 2 and 3: 2 -5 %; Years 4 through 6: 2 -6 %. • Signing Bonus: $1500. • Salary Survey: Performed immediately. Results to be considered by Board. • Health Co -Pays: $10 office visit; $10/$15 generic /brand name prescriptions; $50 emergency room; $50 ambulance. • Retirement: 2% at age 55 effective July 1, 2003. • Retiree Medical Benefits: Must be 55 years of age with 10 years of service for employees hired effective April 18, 2003. Current employees must meet "Rule of 65," where years of service and age equal 65. • Cafeteria Plan Increase: $50 per month for non -cash options in the Plan effective January 1, 2004. • Miscellaneous: Various changes were made to reflect current position titles, to match language in MS /CG agreement with regard to payment of excess vacation accruals, and to make language sections regarding time off consistent with the other bargaining units. In the discussions with the Management Group representatives, the Managers' commitment to the District was clear. Agreement was reached in a cooperative atmosphere and an efficient manner. The Management Group is to be commended for its willingness to consider the State's fiscal condition and its potential impact on District ratepayers. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Adopt the Memorandum of Understanding between the District and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Management Group, covering all positions designated as Management, effective April 18, 2003 through April 17, 2009. HAManagement NegotiationsVnanagementmou .pp.2003.doc 7/9/03 Page 2 of 2