HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/15/2008 AGENDA BACKUPCentral Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: 3.c. Consent Calendar
Type of Action: SET HEARING DATE
subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUNE 19, 2008 AS THE DATE
FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUAIL
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -6
Submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.:
Russell B. Leavitt, Engineering Assistant III Engineering /Environmental Services
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
(� R. Leavitt C. Swanson A. Farrell K. Alm tames M. Ily
�eneral Manager
ISSUE: A public hearing is required to establish the Quail Alhambra Valley Assessment
District (AVAD) No. 2007 -6. A public hearing is also required to create an assessment
district pursuant to the procedure adopted under Proposition 218, which amended the
California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution establishing June 19, 2008 as the date for a
public hearing regarding Quail AVAD No. 2007 -6 pursuant to California Constitution,
Article XIII D, Section 4, and Streets and Highways Code, Sections 5898.20 and
5898.24.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are minor costs for publishing a legal notice advertising
the public hearing and for staff preparation and attendance. These costs will eventually
be paid by the AVAD participants. Subsequent approval of the Quail AVAD would
commit the District to fund up to $319,736 in sewer improvements.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS:
Select a later date for the public meeting - This would delay the AVAD
proceedings. since the holding of a public hearing is required by law.
2. No action by the Board - No action will delay the AVAD proceedings until a
different public hearing date is set since the holding of a public hearing is
required by law.
BACKGROUND: On December 20, 2007, the Board of Directors adopted a resolution
of intention to create Quail AVAD No. 2007 -6 for the purpose of installing sewer
improvements on Alhambra Valley Road and Quail Lane in unincorporated Martinez.
The proposed Quail AVAD No. 2007 -6 complies with the AVAD policy approved at the
November 2, 2006 Board of Directors meeting. Thirteen properties could be served by
a Quail AVAD public sewer. As required by Proposition 218, an Engineer's Report
WENVRSEMPosition Papers \Leavitt\2008 \PP Set Public Hearing Quail AVAD 2007 -6 5- 15- 08.doc Page 1 of 2
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUNE 19, 2008 AS THE DATE
FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUAIL
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -6
estimating assessments for properties within the AVAD has been prepared and
distributed. District staff will provide the Engineer's Report to Board members upon
request. It is now appropriate to schedule a public hearing to offer interested parties the
opportunity to comment on the proposed assessments and related issues. A resolution
has been prepared (Attachment 1), which, if adopted, will set the date of the public
hearing for June 19, 2008.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Adopt a resolution establishing June 19, 2008 as
the date for a public hearing to consider the establishment of Quail Alhambra Valley
(AVAD) No. 2007 -6 pursuant to California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4, and
Streets and Highways Code, Sections 5898.20 and 5898.24.
NAENVRSEMPosition Papers \Leavitt\2008 \PP Set Public Hearing Quail AVAD 2007 -6 5- 15- 08.doc Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION SETTING HEARING OF PROTESTS ON
QUAIL ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
(AVAD NO. 2007 -6)
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, this Board of Directors adopted
Resolution 2007 -198 expressing the intent of the District to proceed with the Quail
Alhambra Valley Assessment District (AVAD) No. 2007 -6 for the purpose of installing
sewer improvements on Alhambra Valley Road and Quail Lane in unincorporated
Martinez, CA; and
WHEREAS, at the direction of this Board of Directors, Curtis W. Swanson,
Environmental Services Division Manager, as Engineer of Work for improvement
proceedings for Quail AVAD No. 2007 -6, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Contra
Costa County, California, has prepared a report described in Section 5898.22 of the
Streets and Highways Code (Municipal Improvement Act of 1911); and
WHEREAS owners of each affected parcel will be provided written notice of the
proposed assessment and ballot to indicate approval or opposition of the assessment
pursuant to the procedures required by California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 4,
as amended by Proposition 218;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District resolves:
This Board sets 2 PM on June 19, 2008 at the Meeting Room of the Board
of Directors, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, California, as the time and place
for hearing protests to the proposed improvements and the creation of the
proposed Alhambra Valley Assessment District and assessment.
NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Leavitt \2008 \Res Quail AVAD 2007 -6 5- 15- 08.doc
2. The Secretary of the District is directed to publish and mail the notices of
improvement required by the Municipal Improvement Act of 1911, and to
file affidavits of compliance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of May 2008, by the Board of Directors of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
Gerald R. Lucey
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Elaine R. Boehme
Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kenton L. Alm
District Counsel
NAENVRSEC \Position Papers 1eavitt \2008 \Res Quail AVAD 2007 -6 5- 15- 08.doc
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
im-
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: 3.d. Consent Calendar
Type of Action: SET HEARING DATE
subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUNE 19, 2008 AS THE DATE
FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TRUNK
SEWER ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -1
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Russell B. Leavitt, Engineering Assistant III Engineering /Environmental Services
REVIEWED AND RECOMME ED FOR BOARD ACTION:
'R. Leavitt C. Swanson A. Farrell K. Alm James M. Kel
General Mana er
ISSUE: A public hearing is required to establish the Trunk Sewer Alhambra Valley
Assessment District (AVAD) No. 2007 -1. A public hearing is also required to create an
assessment district pursuant to the procedure adopted under Proposition 218, which
amended the California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution establishing June 19, 2008 as the date for a
public hearing regarding Trunk Sewer AVAD No. 2007 -1 pursuant to California
Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4, and Streets and Highways Code, Sections
5898.20 and 5898.24.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are minor costs for publishing a legal notice advertising
the public hearing, and for staff preparation and attendance. These costs will eventually
be paid by the AVAD participants. The District has already paid for the Trunk Sewer
AVAD sewer improvements as part of the Alhambra Valley Trunk Sewer project.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS:
Select a later date for the public meeting - This would delay the AVAD
proceedings since the holding of a public hearing is required by law.
2. No action by the Board - No action will delay the AVAD proceedings until a
different public hearing date is set since the holding of a public hearing is
required by law.
BACKGROUND: On December 6, 2007, the Board of Directors adopted a resolution of
intention to create Trunk Sewer AVAD No. 2007 -1 for the purpose of installing sewer
improvements on Alhambra Valley Road, Sheridan Lane, Strentzel Lane, and Wanda
Way in unincorporated Martinez. The proposed Trunk Sewer AVAD No. 2007 -1
complies with the AVAD policy approved at the November 2, 2006 Board of Directors
meeting. Sixty -five properties could be served by a Trunk Sewer AVAD public sewer.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Leavitt\2008 \PP Set Public Hearing Trunk Sewer AVAD 2007 -1 PP 5- 15- 08.doc Page 1 of 2
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUNE 19, 2008 AS THE DATE
FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TRUNK
SEWER ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -1
As required by Proposition 218, an Engineer's Report estimating assessments for
properties within the AVAD has been prepared and distributed. District staff will provide
the Engineer's Report to Board members upon request. It is now appropriate to
schedule a public hearing to offer interested parties the opportunity to comment on the
proposed assessments and related issues. A resolution has been prepared
(Attachment 1), which, if adopted, will set the date of the public hearing for June 19,
2008.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Adopt a resolution establishing June 19, 2008 as
the date for a public hearing to consider the establishment of Trunk Sewer Alhambra
Valley (AVAD) No. 2007 -1 pursuant to California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4,
and Streets and Highways Code, Sections 5898.20 and 5898.24.
NAENVRSEMPosition Papers \Leavitt\2008 \PP Set Public Hearing Trunk Sewer AVAD 2007 -1 PP 5- 15- 08.doc Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION SETTING HEARING OF PROTESTS ON
TRUNK SEWER ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
(AVAD NO. 2007 -1)
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2007, this Board of Directors adopted Resolution
2007 -180 expressing the intent of the District to proceed with the Trunk Sewer
Alhambra Valley Assessment District (AVAD) No. 2007 -1 for the purpose of installing
sewer improvements on Alhambra Valley Road, Sheridan Lane, Strentzel Lane, and
Wanda Way in unincorporated Martinez, CA; and
WHEREAS, at the direction of this Board of Directors, Curtis W. Swanson,
Environmental Services Division Manager, as Engineer of Work for improvement
proceedings for Trunk Sewer AVAD No. 2007 -1, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,
Contra Costa County, California, has prepared a report described in Section 5898.22 of
the Streets and Highways Code (Municipal Improvement Act of 1911); and
WHEREAS, owners of each affected parcel will be provided written notice of the
proposed assessment and ballot to indicate approval or opposition of the assessment
pursuant to the procedures required by California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 4,
as amended by Proposition 218;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District resolves:
This Board sets 2 PM on June 19, 2008 at the Meeting Room of the Board
of Directors, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, California, as the time and place
for hearing protests to the proposed improvements and the creation of the
proposed Alhambra Valley Assessment District and assessment.
NAENVRSEMPosition Papers \Leavitt\2008 \Res Trunk Sewer AVAD 2007 -1 5- 15- 08.doc
2. The Secretary of the District is directed to publish and mail the notices of
improvement required by the Municipal Improvement Act of 1911, and to
file affidavits of compliance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of May 2008, by the Board of Directors of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
Gerald R. Lucey
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Elaine R. Boehme
Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kenton L. Alm
District Counsel
NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Leavitt \2008 \Res Trunk Sewer AVAD 2007 -1 5- 15- 08.doc
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: 3.e. Consent Calendar
Type of Action: ADOPT ARBITRATOR'S RECOMMENDATION
subject: DENY APPEAL AND ADOPT THE ARBITRATOR'S RECOMMENDATION IN
THE DISCIPLINARY MATTER OF MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN III
MARK LAFFERTY
Submitted By: Cathryn Freitas, H. R. Initiating Dept /Div.: Administration /Human
Manager Resources
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
C. Freitas sgraves James M. elly,
General M Hager
ISSUE: In accordance with the disciplinary procedure in the current Memorandum of
Understanding between the District and the Employees' Association, Public Employees'
Union, Local One, the Board of Directors may adopt, reject or modify the
recommendation of an appointed neutral third party (arbitrator) in disciplinary matters.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the arbitrator's recommendation to deny the appeal of
Mechanical Maintenance Technician III Mark Lafferty and uphold the termination.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Reject or modify the arbitrator's
recommendation.
BACKGROUND: On November 15, 2007, the Board directed staff to secure the
services of an arbitrator in the Step Four appeal of Mechanical Maintenance Technician
III Mark Lafferty. Mr. Lafferty was terminated for failure to follow procedures and
habitual absenteeism.
Ms. Wilma Rader, Esq., heard the appeal on April 1, 2008 and issued her decision on
April 24, 2008. The arbitrator found that there was just cause for the termination. Mr.
Lafferty broke his agreement with the District and the termination was pursuant to the
terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. The full opinion has been submitted to
the Board under separate cover.
The Board may adopt, reject or modify the recommendation of the arbitrator. The
decision of the Board is the final action of the District.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Deny the appeal and adopt the arbitrator's
recommendation to uphold the termination.
4.a. Hearings
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON APPROVAL OF THE
RELIEZ VALLE ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3
(AVAD NO. 2007 -3), DISTRICT PROJECT 6439
SUGGESTED AGENDA
MAY 15, 2008
Request staff report
Public hearing on Reliez Valley Alhambra Valley Assessment District No. 2007 -3
(AVAD 2007 -3)
A. Open public hearing
B. Receive public comment
C, Request staff response, as appropriate
D. Close public hearing
III. Board deliberation of the following actions regarding approval of the Reliez Valley
Alhambra Valley Assessment District No. 2007 -3:
a) Find that the project is exempt from CEQA.
b) Adopt a resolution overruling protests.
c) Adopt a resolution confirming compliance with California Constitution, Article
XIIID, Section 4
d) Adopt a resolution approving the Engineer's Report, assessments, and
ordering improvement
e) Authorizing the General Manager to execute an agreement with the
Reliez Valley area owners.
NAENVRSEMPosition Papers \Swanson\2008Wgenda for Public Hearing Reliez Valley 5- 15- 08.doc
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: 4.a. 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 PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RELIEZ VALLEY
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3, DISTRICT PROJECT
NO. 6439
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Curtis Swanson, Division Manager Engineering /Environmental Services
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
O)OD
C. Swanson
04 1 4 � k4
A. FarrW K. Alm
James ff. K ly
General Manager
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 Reliez Valley Alhambra Valley
Assessment District (AVAD) No. 2007 -3.
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct the public hearing, find that the project is exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and approve Reliez Valley AVAD
2007 -3, District Project No. 6439.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The estimated total project cost is $326,315. The District has
authorized up to $3 million for AVADs over the next three years. This would be the
second AVAD project authorized by the Board. Cumulative authorizations would total
$877,219.
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 parcel owners in the Reliez Valley Road neighborhood of
Alhambra Valley in unincorporated Martinez 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 Board approved the Alhambra
Valley Assessment District Policy by Resolution 2006 -117 on November 2, 2006. This
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson \2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 1 of 11
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
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 PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RELIEZ VALLEY
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3, DISTRICT PROJECT
NO. 6439
policy established criteria for formation of a contractual assessment district. The Reliez
Valley AVAD meets all of the criteria for formation of a contractual assessment district.
There are 14 properties that could benefit from this AVAD project. The Board of
Directors adopted a Resolution of Intention to form a contractual assessment district on
December 6, 2007. The proposed sewer includes approximately 1,650 linear feet of
8 -inch sewer main and appurtenant works and facilities that will serve the proponents'
14 existing properties, most 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 6, 2007, the Board of Directors adopted a resolution directing the
preparation of a report for an Alhambra Valley Assessment District known as Reliez
Valley AVAD No. 2007 -3. A report has been prepared, and assessments have been
estimated. (The Engineer's Report is being provided to the Board under separate
cover.) On April 17, 2008, the Board of Directors set a public hearing for May 15, 2008.
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 Reliez Valley AVAD No. 2007 -3, the following actions are
necessary:
1. 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; and
b. Consider public testimony on the Resolution of Intention and the
Engineer's Report.
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.
b. Resolution confirming compliance with California Constitution, Article
XIIID, Section 4.
c. Resolution approving the Engineer's Report, assessments, and ordering
improvement.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 2 of 11
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
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 PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RELIEZ VALLEY
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3, DISTRICT PROJECT
NO. 6439
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
accordance with the Alhambra Valley Assessment District Policy, and 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 constructed 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;
• give owners an opportunity to pay off some or all of their assessments up front
and amortize any remaining 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 fifteen -year period.
The estimated cost of the Reliez Valley AVAD No. 2007 -3 is $326,315. A summary of
project costs is shown in Exhibit B. Funding for the AVAD Program is included in the
2007 -2008 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB). The District has authorized up to $3
million for AVAD projects over the next three years. This would be the second AVAD
project authorized by the Board. Cumulative authorizations would total $877,219.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 3 of 11
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
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 PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RELIEZ VALLEY
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3, DISTRICT PROJECT
NO. 6439
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 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 (limited
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.
• Find that the project is exempt from CEQA.
• 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 Reliez Valley
area owners.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 4 of 11
MARTINEgl-
WtIM 4
t
SITE
LOCATION_ MAP
N.T.S.��_,
r'
MoIITEI LN
Its RD
*i G
Nilp
i
r.
i
LEGEND: N
POTENTIAL
AVAD AREA
$ AVAD SEWER
w
o u aoo
POSSIBLE AVAD
PARTICIPANTS FUT
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District Exhibit
PROPOSED BOUNDARY OF
' RELIEZ VALLEY AVAD NO. 2007-3 /4
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 5 of 11
EXHIBIT B
SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS
RELIEZ VALLEY AVAD NO. 2007-3
Construction
$271,343
Engineering
$35,205
District Services
$19,767
TOTAL
$326,315
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson \2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 6 of 11
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS RELIEZ VALLEY
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3
The Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District resolves:
On May 15, 2008, the Board of Directors held a public hearing on the Resolution
of Intention and the Engineer's Report on the proposed improvement in Reliez Valley
Alhambra Valley Assessment District No. 2007 -3.
At or before the time set for the 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 15th day of May 2008, by the Board of Directors of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
Gerald R. Lucey
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Elaine R. Boehme, Secretary
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 7 of 11
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 4
RELIEZ VALLEY ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3
The Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District resolves:
1. The Board set 2 PM on May 15, 2008, 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 15th day of May 2008, by the Board of Directors of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES:
Members:
NOES:
Members:
ABSENT:
Members:
Gerald R. Lucey
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Elaine R. Boehme, Secretary
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 8 of 11
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT
AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT
RELIEZ VALLEY ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2007 -3
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 Reliez Valley Alhambra Valley Assessment District No. 2007 -3, 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 will be 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 1,650 linear feet of
sanitary sewer line, together with appurtenant work and facilities
located at Reliez Valley Road in unincorporated Martinez, CA
3. The Engineer's report and the preliminary contractual assessment for the
improvement for the participating parcels in the described Reliez Valley Alhambra Valley
Assessment District No. 2007 -3 were prepared in accordance with the Alhambra Valley
Assessment District Policy that was approved by attached Resolution No. 2006 -117.
4. After completion of construction of the improvement, the District shall levy a
contractual assessment upon participating parcels within the described Reliez Valley
Alhambra Valley Assessment District No. 2007 -3 in accordance with the Alhambra
Valley Assessment District Policy, and with the benefit received by each parcel of land,
respectively, from the improvement.
5. The Board called a hearing of protests on the Reliez Valley Alhambra Valley
Assessment District No. 2007 -3. Notice of the hearing was given by publication and by
mailing to affected parcel owners, all according to the Municipal Improvement Act of
1911. Proof of publication was filed with the Secretary of the District.
6. 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 Alhambra Valley
Assessment District Program improvement and the extent of the Assessment District.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 9 of 11
7. 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.
8. 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.
Document or Event
Date
Number
or Action
a. Resolution of Intention
12/6/08
2007 -186
b. Resolution Approving Boundary Map
12/6/08
2007 -187
c. Boundary Map Filed with Co9nty Recorder
Pending
--
d. Certificate of Mailing Notice of Improvement
4/7/08
--
e. Affidavit of Publication of Notice of Improvement
Pending--
9. The Board approves the Engineer's Report and each component part of it,
including each exhibit incorporated by reference in the report.
10. 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.
11. The Board orders the improvement described in paragraph 2 and as
detailed in the Engineer's Report.
12. According to Section 10603 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Board
designates the District Controller to collect and receive payment of the assessments.
13. 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).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of May 2008, by the Board of Directors of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES:
Members:
NOES:
Members:
ABSENT:
Members:
Gerald R. Lucey
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 10 of 11
COUNTERSIGNED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Elaine R. Boehme, Secretary Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 11 of 11
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- 117
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT POLICY
WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ( CCCSD) has, over the
last several years, identified a prevalent sanitation issue occurring within Alhambra
Valley, south of the City of Martinez, said issue being the need to replace residential
septic systems by connection to CCCSD's collection system; and
WHEREAS, this sanitation issue is increasing in importance as a result of the
failure of existing septic systems due to age; and
WHEREAS, in order to replace failing septic systems with connections to the
public sewers, extension of existing public sewer mains is frequently required; and
WHEREAS, the cost and complexity of undertaking a sewer main extension may
prevent a single homeowner from connecting to the public sewer system thus
perpetuating an ongoing health and environmental problem; and
WHEREAS, public policy, as well as legal and fiscal constraints, limit the ability of
CCCSD to build or extend local street sewers to serve individual or small groups of
existing homes; and
WHEREAS, CCCSD is in the process of constructing a trunk sewer in Alhambra
Valley to serve as the backbone of an area -wide public sewer network; and
WHEREAS, the use of assessment districts can provide the structure and
financial assistance required to encourage neighbors to jointly undertake projects to
provide sewer service to their properties; and
WHEREAS, since 1997 on a demonstration basis, and from 1999 to 2004 on a
program basis, CCCSD has made use of the provisions of the Streets and Highways
Code Section 5898, et seq. in order to create Contractual Assessment Districts in order
to provide for assessment financing of main extensions for failing septic systems; and
Page 1 of 11
Resolution No. 2006 -117
WHEREAS, at its July 20, 2006 meeting, CCCSD's Board of Directors voted
unanimously to conceptually approve an Alhambra Valley Assessment District program.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District adopts the Alhambra Valley Assessment District Policy Statement, attached as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
The Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District further finds
that this policy shall remain in effect until such further order of the Board; however, the
adoption of this policy does not create any vested right or entitlement to any parcel
owners within CCCSD's sphere of influence concerning eligibility for this program, nor
shall CCCSD be precluded from modifying or terminating this program at any time it
deems appropriate. The adoption of this policy also does not set a precedent for future
funding of other neighborhoods' main sewers.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of November 2006 by the Board of
Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES: Members: Boneysteele, Hockett, Nejedly, llenesini
NOES: Members: Lucey
ABSENT: Members: None
Mario M. Menesini
President of the Board of Directors,
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Elaine R. Boehme
Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa State of Califo
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kenton . AI
District Counsel
Page 2 of 11
EXHIBIT A
ALHAMBRA VALLEY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
POLICY STATEMENT
Introduction
This policy statement for the Alhambra Valley Assessment District (AVAD) Program
establishes the criteria for formation of AVAD projects, the process for the AVAD
program, and methodology for allocating costs and assessments among AVAD
participants.
The AVAD program will consist of voluntary Contractual Assessment Districts (CADs),
which are formed pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 5898, et seq. to
extend sewer facilities to residential areas currently served by septic tank and leachfield
systems.
AVAD Program Purpose
The purpose of the AVAD Program is to provide financial assistance to Alhambra Valley
property owners so that they may extend the public sewer system to serve their
developed properties. The goals of the AVAD Program are to assist property owners
with septic tanks to finance the cost of extending and connecting to the public sewer; to
avoid future use of septic systems and sewage pumping systems in Alhambra Valley;
and to facilitate direct and indirect connections to the Alhambra Valley trunk sewer so
that CCCSD can be reimbursed more quickly for its planning, design, and construction
expenditures associated with the trunk sewer extension.
AVAD Program Fundina
CCCSD will budget sufficient funds for the extension of public sewer mains in Alhambra
Valley. This amount is estimated to be $3.5 million. Funds for construction of the trunk
sewer have already been budgeted. The Board of Directors, at its discretion, may
modify this program, including increasing or decreasing the budgetary ceiling, at
Page 3 of 11
anytime. Nothing in this policy is intended to bind CCCSD to continue with the program
for any predetermined time period, nor does it create any right or entitlement in favor of
potential program participants.
Definitions
e An Alhambra Valley Assessment District (AVAD) is a contractual assessment
district (CAD), a legal entity, established pursuant to Streets and Highways Code
Chapter 5898 for the purpose of. financing the construction of sewers in
residential areas currently being served by septic tanks.
e Parcel or Property denotes in this Policy a piece of residential real estate,
including land and anything permanently affixed to the land including buildings.
The terms parcel and property have the same meaning herein and shall refer to
the divisions of property as indicated on County Assessor's Parcel maps.
e Direct connectors are parcels that can connect by lateral to the Alhambra Valley
Trunk Sewer being constructed by CCCSD.
e Indirect connectors are parcels that can connect by lateral to a public sewer main
that is tributary to a part of the Alhambra Valley Trunk Sewer.
e Participants are owners of direct or indirect connector properties who voluntarily
agree to enter into an AVAD contract.
e Non - participants are owners of direct or indirect connector properties who do not
to enter into an AVAD contract. Non - participants will not be assessed for their
share of the sewer improvement costs until the time of connection.
e Participant Parcels are the direct or indirect connector properties owned by
Participants.
e Non participant Parcels are the direct or indirect connector properties owned by
non - participants.
Page 4 of 11
• AVAD Non participant Reimbursement Fees are fees collected from owners of
Non - participant Parcels at the time of connection to the sewer to reimburse
CCCSD for the Non - participant Parcel's share of the cost of sewer improvements
installed under an AVAD.
Criteria for Formation
In order to be eligible for participation in CCCSD's AVAD assessment financing
program, the proposed sewer extension project must meet the AVAD formation criteria.
The criteria are as follows:
• A minimum of three properties must be directly tributary to a proposed AVAD
facility.
• A minimum of 60 percent of the properties directly tributary to a proposed AVAD
facility must already be developed.
e A minimum of half of the properties directly tributary to a proposed AVAD facility
must be willing to be a Participant, except in the case of the AVAD for Direct
connectors to the Alhambra Valley Trunk Sewer.
a A Participant Parcel may not have more than two (2) dwellings on it to participate
in an AVAD.
• Two or more proposed unconnected AVAD facilities may be combined into a
single AVAD for administrative purposes. When this happens, the expenses and
assessments for individual, unrelated facilities will be separated and assigned to
the respective, benefiting properties.
e After completion of the Alhambra Valley Trunk Sewer, CCCSD will establish
Direct and Indirect connector reimbursement charges for the trunk sewer and
form the first AVAD (AVAD No. 1) to finance allowable costs of direct connector
Page 5 of 11
participants. Direct connectors will have one year from the establishment of the
trunk sewer AVAD No. 1 to become Participants by signing an AVAD contract.
• Indirect connectors wishing to become Participants will have three years from the
establishment of the AVAD No. 1, for the trunk sewer, to obtain CCCSD approval
to initiate formation for an AVAD for their neighborhood, and eighteen months
thereafter to receive CCCSD approval of an AVAD election. AVADs will be
numbered sequentially in the time order initiated by CCCSD.
Notwithstanding the above - listed criteria, CCCSD will consider exceptions to this policy
on a case -by -case basis. CCCSD may consider technical, economic, staffing,
budgetary, environmental, and other factors in its consideration of whether to form an
AVAD and the ultimate decision is at the sole discretion of the Board of Directors.
AVAD Formation Process
There are several staff level actions and three Board approval steps in the AVAD
process. CCCSD's Board of Directors will consider approval of individual AVAD
projects which staff has determined meet the formation criteria. The following Board
actions are required:
• Initiation of an AVAD
• Approval of the Engineer's Report and assessments; ordering of the
improvements; and approval of the AVAD election.
• Approval and levying of final assessments.
1. Initial Actions
• Groups of Alhambra Valley property owners may be eligible for an AVAD
if they can directly connect to the Alhambra Valley Trunk Sewer or seek
a sewer main extension to provide for connection to CCCSD system.
CCCSD staff will work with the owners to explain the AVAD process. If
Page 6 of 11
a sufficient number of property owners and CCCSD remain interested in
proceeding with an AVAD and the criteria for AVAD formation appears
to be met, CCCSD will consider initiation of an AVAD. Property owners
will be requested to submit letters indicating their interest in formation of
an AVAD. Property owners must already be included in District
Annexation 168 (Resolution of Application 2006 -047, adopted by the
Board of Directors on July 6, 2006). Staff will issue a letter setting forth
its initial determination of eligibility for the AVAD program.
• If CCCSD staff determines that a proposed AVAD does not meet the
formation criteria, staff will notify the property owners in the proposed
AVAD of the staff decision in writing. Property owners may appeal this
staff decision to the CCCSD Board of Directors in accordance with
Chapter 1.16 of the District Code except as modified by this policy. This
policy allows property owners 30 days to request an appeal of a staff
decision. The Secretary of CCCSD will schedule the matter for a
hearing before the Board of Directors and provide written notice of the
time and place of that hearing to the affected property owners.
2. Creation of Assessment District
• Participants are required to retain an engineer to design and solicit bids
for the private work (the sewer facilities).
• An Engineer's Report estimating project costs and assessment levels
will be prepared by CCCSD in accordance with state law. Residents will
have 18 months from when CCCSD initiates formation of an AVAD to
submit sewer plans, construction bids, and other information necessary
for CCCSD to prepare an Engineer's Report.
Page 7 of 11
• CCCSD will distribute Notices of Proposed Assessment and conduct an
election in accordance with state law by which property owners may
indicate their approval of or opposition to the proposed assessment.
The Board of Directors will conduct a public hearing to announce the
outcome of the election and receive public comment about the proposed
assessment.
• Following the public hearing, the Board of Directors will determine the
election results and consider approval of the Engineer's Report,
preliminary assessments, and the AVAD improvements.
• If the proponent property owners do not provide all necessary
information, including approved plans and construction bids, within 18
months of CCCSD's initiation of the AVAD proceedings, the AVAD
process will be terminated.
3. Assessment Contract and Construction
Following approval by the Board of Directors of the Engineer's Report
and AVAD improvements, the Participants must enter into a written
contract with CCCSD, which describes the responsibilities of the parties,
the work, and the provisions for payments.
• CCCSD will undertake the procedural requirements to form the AVAD;
review the plans for compliance with CCCSD standards, finance the
work, and establish the assessments.
• Participants are required to hire a contractor and to supervise the
construction of the private works AVAD facilities. CCCSD will have no
contractual relationship with the contractor and will not provide
construction management or site supervision; however, CCCSD will
Page W11 11
inspect the project consistent with prevailing CCCSD inspection
procedures.
• CCCSD will accept the work if the work is done in accordance with
CCCSD's standards.
• Participants shall be required to provide all project cost records and
related information. CCCSD staff will review project costs, evaluate
eligible project costs, and determine the proposed final assessments.
The Board of Directors will then consider approval and levying of the
final assessments.
4. Payments and Assessments
• Unless limited by other provisions of this policy, each Participant shall
have the option to pay for his share of AVAD expenses after the work is
completed by either: 1) lump sum cash payment or 2) by contractually
subjecting the Participant's property to an annual assessment, including
interest, over the term of the AVAD.
• The term of the Participant's assessment (payback period) shall be
fifteen years with no interest penalty for early payoff. The interest rate
shall be fixed when the CCCSD General Manager signs the contract
between the Participants and CCCSD. The annual interest rate for
assessments shall be 1 percent above the then current average interest
rate on CCCSD temporary investments or 1 percent above the interest
rate at which CCCSD has borrowed funds for the AVAD Program. The
minimum interest rate shall be six percent.
• Participants are limited to use of the fifteen -year annual assessment
payment option for no more than two parcels at any given time. If a
Page 9 of 11
person(s) owns three or more parcels in the same AVAD or different
AVADs, that person(s) may be a Participant for three or more parcels,
but will be eligible for the annual assessment option for only two parcels.
The shares of the AVAD expenses for the other parcels must be paid by
the lump sum payment option at time of connection.
• The assessments shall be equal for each Participant Parcel unless
otherwise provided for in the contract and documents creating the
AVAD. If an existing Participant's Parcel can be legally subdivided,
there are two dwellings currently existing on a single parcel or other cost
of service related factors justifying differing assessments are present,
said Parcel may be assigned more than one assessment.
• To determine the assessment for each AVAD Parcel, the Board of
Directors will divide the total allowable project costs by the total number
of benefiting properties, adjusting for exceptions as noted above.
• The costs of the work associated with designing and constructing
sanitary sewer mains, manholes, rodding inlets, and private sewer
laterals within public streets or right -of -way may be included as eligible
costs of the AVAD. Other eligible AVAD costs include paving and other
appurtenances within public streets, rights of way necessary to bring the
sewer service to a Participant Parcel, CCCSD's Capacity Fee, and
CCCSD's Alhambra Valley Trunk Sewer reimbursement charge.
• The cost of septic tank abandonment, installation of the private sewer
laterals (not within a public street or public right of way), and other
CCCSD fees and charges customarily due upon connection to the public
sewer shall be excluded from AVAD financing. For purposes of this
Page 10 of 11
paragraph, "rights of way" shall include public or private roads providing
legal ingress and egress to multiple parcels.
• The AVAD assessments will be imposed on each Participant Parcel and
recorded as a lien against the Parcel. The assessment will include the
principal and interest and will be collected on the property tax bill as an
assessment along with taxes and other assessments and charges on
the subject parcel.
5. AVAD Non - participant Reimbursement Fees
• CCCSD initially will be responsible for the Non - participant Parcels' share
of AVAD costs. Non - participants will reimburse CCCSD for these costs
as they connect to AVAD facilities in the future.
• When CCCSD staff determines that there are Non - participant Parcels
that could connect to an AVAD facility, the Board of Directors, in
accordance with CCCSD practice and the AVAD contract, will establish
AVAD Non - participant Reimbursement Fees. The obligation of a Non-
participant Parcel owner to pay a reimbursement fee upon connection to
an AVAD facility will not expire; CCCSD will collect AVAD Non-
participant Reimbursement Fees indefinitely.
• The Board of Directors will establish AVAD Non - participant
Reimbursement Fees when the final assessments are established for
AVAD Participants. Subsequent adjustments to AVAD Non - participant
Reimbursement Fees may be made by the Board of Directors
periodically to recover CCCSD's carrying cost of advancing the Non-
participants' share of AVAD expenses.
Page 11 of 11
�
O
�
O
-p
N
O
Ln
�'
cv
I - —
,
tI MARTINEZ
a
j J M
SrrE
FLEASAW -
_ MILL
LOCATION MAP
- - N.T.S.
J
aaAry!- .
NOLL -
O
I
- - - -i
I f I
I I
I 1
-! MOIVTEI LN
googol 416,661144 is'
I `
j 1124SIjklosto ,.,,.,,.,,. RD
tIME ■
LEGEND: N
POTENTIAL
AVAD AREA
b'
1
AVAD SEWER 1
1
o 3W I
POSSIBLE AVAD
PARTICIPANTS rc�
k�
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District Exhibit
PROPOSED BOUNDARY OF
RELIEZ VALLEY AVAD N0.2007 -3 A
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Conduct Hearing Reliez Valley AVAD 2007 -03 5- 15- 08.doc Page 5 of 11
c
0
p 'gin
Qw
fu
� c
N
L
�
N
N
�
oC
Cn
.fo
L
L
'i'
u
0
a
(n
■
N
2 MESONS
N
Q
O
L
c%
CI'
,--I
(n
L
.T
4�
O
CL
■
Z
L
V
W
4-
O
O
Ln
O
■
W
TMMMMI
N
M
i&
N
fu
-W
W
C
L
N
N
■
TMMMMI
l�
O
M
..
O
L
Q�)
ui
M
Q
M
L
cn
--
O
U
W
C
N
N
L
C
L
V
4�
M
O
TMMMMI
M
iA-
a-+
C
N
cp
a
fu
CMMM
0
M
O
(n N
� O
� Z
(n p
Q
w �
W
O
N
,--q
a-+
N
Q
O
L
Q
Q
i
W
�J
O
m
C
V)
(n
N
Q
N
O
fl.
a.
r�
4�
4�
O
N
■ ■
cn
O
O
■
V
N
w �
W
O
N
,--q
a-+
N
Q
O
L
Q
Q
i
W
�J
O
m
C
V)
(n
N
Q
N
O
fl.
a.
r�
4�
4�
O
N
■ ■
cn
O
O
■
fo
(1)
E
fu
L
�1
O
L
a
D
Q
Q
4�
fu
NIMEMEN
C
N
.fl
N
fo
D
Q
Q
■
0
1
O
L
CIO
Q
fu
COOO
a
Q
W
4-J M
O rn
-o L
O O
O =3
V
Lr)
4�
n
Ln
Q
Q fu
kD
■
(af )
:3
ro
Cn
rp
L
CD
O
L
a
D
Q
Q
00
00
00
Ln
O
00
00
0
00
(3)
\
O
0
\
V)
ko
%0
N
l0
N
cn
p1
p1
p1
p1
p1
4-J
O
•=
C
C
c
C
C
f
LO
Q
=
_
_
_
_
_
O
rl
N
01
O
M
O
L17
Q
`
4-J rip
k0
O
m
O
N
O
L
Ln
N
O V
00
N
.-q
O
O
U
�
Z=
a
�
�
M
�
M
i
N
.
5N
M
m
kO
N
0
O
O
O
O
O
N
o
O
O
O
'N
N
U)
o
L
4-J
\ (v
O
c
Q)
°
a
u c
J
cr
M
cu
\
.�
�°',
N
Q
_
O =
di
p
O
ra
O
CD 2:
ce
U
2:
U
Q'
>
I _
4 A . Hearings
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON
THE DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FOR 2008 -09
AND THE DRAFT 2008 TEN -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SUGGESTED AGENDA
MAY 15, 2008
I. Request staff presentation.
II. Conduct public hearing:
A. Open public hearing.
B. Receive public comments.
C. Request staff response, as appropriate.
D. Close public hearing.
III. Board deliberation to consider approval of the 2008 Ten -Year Capital
Improvement Plan, and approval of the Capital Improvement Budget for Fiscal
Year 2008 -09 for inclusion in the overall 2008 -09 District Budget.
WENVRSEC \Position Papers \Mi1iier \2008 \CIP CIB Agenda Hearing 5- 15- 08.doc
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: 4.b. Hearings
Type of Action: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING; APPROVE CIB /CIP
subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET FOR FY 2008 -09, AND THE 2008 TEN -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PLAN, APPROVE THE 2008 CIP, AND APPROVE THE CIB FOR INCLUSION IN
THE FY 2008 -09 DISTRICT BUDGET
Submitted By:
Earlene Millier, Engineering Assistant III
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
21-e
E. Millier G. Chesler
Initiating Dept /Div.:
Engineering /Environmental Services
cu)I 6
C. Swanson
Ow
A. Farrell
0/04
ames M. elly
14eneral Ma ager
ISSUE: The Board of Directors has established May 15, 2008 as the date for a public
hearing on the Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) for FY 2008 -09 and the 2008
Ten -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Board approval of the CIP and the CIB for
inclusion in the FY 2008 -09 District Budget is requested.
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the CIB /CIP.
Approve the 2008 CIP. Approve the CIB for inclusion in the FY 2008 -09 District Budget.
Approval of the budget and plan will establish the Board of Directors' independent finding
that these documents are exempt from CEQA and that CCCSD either has or will produce
appropriate CEQA compliance documentation prior to undertaking any project identified
in these documents.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approval of the FY 2008 -09 CIB and 2008 CIP is a necessary
step prior to Board adoption. Approval will include an estimated carry-over from 2007 -08
of $30,780,000 and an additional authorization of $31,469,000 from the Sewer
Construction Fund; resulting in a total FY 2008 -09 Board authorized funding level of
$62,249,000. This will allow expenditures to continue on the District's Capital
Improvement Program.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: The Board could direct staff to modify the CIB
and /or CIP to reduce or increase the planned capital expenditures. The Board could
also defer approval to a later date. These alternatives are not recommended.
BACKGROUND: The CIP provides the basis for project prioritizing and scheduling, and
long -range financial planning. The CIP also provides the framework for analyzing
different capital program funding scenarios. The 2008 CIP covers the ten -year period
from FY 2008 -09 through FY 2017 -18. The plan includes expenditures totaling $339.2
million (2008 dollars) over ten years.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Millier\2008 \PP Conduct Public Hearing FY 08 -09 CIB 5- 15- 08.DOC Page 1 of 3
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET FOR FY 2008 -09, AND THE 2008 TEN -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PLAN, APPROVE THE 2008 CIP, AND APPROVE THE CIB FOR INCLUSION IN
THE FY 2008 -09 DISTRICT BUDGET
The CIB provides a detailed presentation of the schedules and cost estimates for
projects proposed for the first year of the ten -year planning period. These estimates are
the basis of the request for the Board's authorization of funds for FY 2008 -09 from the
Sewer Construction Fund to the Treatment Plant, Collection System, General
Improvements, and Recycled Water Programs.
A draft CIB /CIP was submitted to the Board of Directors on March 7, 2008. A special
meeting of the Board to discuss the draft was held on April 10, 2008. It is appropriate for
the Board to receive comments from the public prior to considering approval of the
CIB /CIP. The Board established May 15, 2008 as the date for a public hearing to
receive these comments and appropriate notices have been posted and published.
Capital Budget Authorization
Adoption of the CIB with the FY 2008 -09 District Budget will authorize additional funds
from the Sewer Construction Fund for planning, design, and construction of capital
improvement projects. The new funding authorization will include an estimated carry-
over of $30,780,000 from Board authorizations in previous years, and an estimated
additional authorization of $31,469,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund resulting in a
total Fiscal Year 2008 -09 authorized funding level of $62,249,000. These figures will be
adjusted in August on a revised Table 1 when actual FY 2007 -08 expenditures are
known and actual FY 2007 -08 carry-over can be determined.
It should be noted that specific Board approval is required for consultant agreements
over $50,000, for award of construction contracts over $15,000, for construction change
orders over $50,000, and for project overruns in excess of 15 percent (15 %) of the final
project budget established at the time of construction contract award. The distribution of
the funding authorization to the four capital improvement programs is shown on
Attachment 1. The estimated expenditures for the capital program in FY 2008 -09 are
also shown in Attachment 1 and total $38,858,000.
Ten -Year Capital Plan
The draft 2008 CIP includes $121.6 million (2008 dollars) for Treatment Plant projects
(35.9% of total expenditures), $178.2 million for Collection System projects (52.4% of
total expenditures), $35.2 million for General Improvements projects (10.4% of total
expenditures), and $4.3 million for Recycled Water projects (1.3% of total expenditures)
over the next ten years. A cash flow table is included in the Ten -Year Capital Plan and
NAENVRSEC\Position Papers \Millier\2008 \PP Conduct Public Hearing FY 08 -09 CIB 5- 15- 08.DOC Page 2 of 3
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET FOR FY 2008 -09, AND THE 2008 TEN -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PLAN, APPROVE THE 2008 CIP, AND APPROVE THE CIB FOR INCLUSION IN
THE FY 2008 -09 DISTRICT BUDGET
indicates the revenue needed to support the planned ten -year expenditures. This table
includes the revenue from the proposed $11 rate increase. If this rate increase is not
adopted, the cash flow table will be corrected and reissued.
Staff has evaluated the CIB and CIP and concluded that they are exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CCCSD CEQA Guidelines Section
15262 since they are planning studies for possible future actions, which CCCSD has not
approved, adopted or funded, and the outcome of these tasks will not have a legally
binding effect on later activities. Approval of the budget and plan will establish the Board
of Directors' independent finding that these documents are exempt from CEQA. The
Board further finds that CCCSD either has or will produce appropriate CEQA compliance
documentation prior to undertaking any "project" identified in these documents.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on
the CIB and CIP. Approve the 2008 CIP. Approve the FY 2008 -09 CIB for inclusion in
the FY 2008 -09 District Budget. Approval of the budget and plan will establish the Board
of Directors' independent finding that these documents are exempt from CEQA and that
CCCSD either has or will produce appropriate CEQA compliance documentation prior to
undertaking any project identified in these documents.
NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Millier\2008 \PP Conduct Public Hearing FY 08 -09 CIB 5- 15- 08.DOC Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT 1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET SUMMARY
FY 2008 -09
1 This number represents funds that have been authorized by the Board, allocated to
projects by the General Manager, but not spent during FY 2007 -08.
NAENVRSEC \Position PapersWillier \2008\Attachment 1 to 2008 -09 CIP CIB 5- 15- 08.doc
Estimated
Carryover
Additional
Total
Estimated
Program
from
Authorization
Proposed
FY 2008 -09
FY 2007 -08 1
Requested
Authorization
Expenditures
Treatment Plant
$16,279,000
$10,660,000
$26,939,000
$12,680,000
Collection System
$13,688,000
$17,339,000
$31,027,000
$22,355,000
General
Improvements
$783,000
$3,071,000
$3,854,000
$3,418,000
Recycled Water
$30,000
$399,000
$429,000
$405,000
Total
$30,780,000
$31,469,000
$62,249,000
$38,858,000
1 This number represents funds that have been authorized by the Board, allocated to
projects by the General Manager, but not spent during FY 2007 -08.
NAENVRSEC \Position PapersWillier \2008\Attachment 1 to 2008 -09 CIP CIB 5- 15- 08.doc
Item 4.b.
2008/09
Capital Improvements Program
Public Hearing
May 15, 2008
2008/09 Capital Cash Flow Estimate
Capital Program Cash Flow
2008/09
Total Budgeted Revenue
$38,264,000
Total Budgeted Expenditures
$38,858,000
Negative Variance
($594,000)
Projected SCF Balance June 30, 2009
$47,173,000
Capital Improvement Budget Summary for
2008/09
2008/09 Expenditure Recommendations
EXPENDITURES
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Total
Program
FY 2008109
Carry-over from
Allocation
FY 2008109
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Program
Expenditures
Prior Fiscal Year
FY 2008109
proposed
Authorization
Treatment Plant
$ 12,680,000
$ 16,279,000
$ 10,660,000
$ 26,939,000
Collection System
22,355,000
13,688,000
17,339,000
31,027,000
General Improvements
3,418,000
783,000
3,071,000
3,854,000
Recycled Water
405,000
30,000
399,000
429,000
Total this Fiscal Year
$ 38,858,000 1
$ 30,780,000 1
$ 31,469,000
$ 62,249,000
2008/09 Expenditure Recommendations
EXPENDITURES
2008/09
Collection System
$ 22,355,000
Treatment Plant
12,680,000
General Improvements
3,418,000
Recycled Water
405,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$ 38,858,000
2008/09 Budgeted Revenue
Revenues
2008/09
Facility Capacity Fees
$ 6,250,000
Pumped Zone Fees
1,125,000
Interest
1,500,000
Ad Valorem Taxes
8,636,000
City of Concord
11,264,000
Sewer Service Charges $58 /RUE
8,510,000
Other Fees & Charges
979,000
1,200,000
1,325,000
Total Revenue
$ 38,264,000
2008/09 Expenditures
Collection System Program
PROJECT
2008109
Expenditures
Total
Project Cost
A -Line phase 2A
$ 8,125,000
$ 21,590,000
Walnut Creek Renovations phase 6
1,800,000
2,015,000
Lafayette Renovations phase 5
1,500,000
1,650,000
Camino Pablo Trunk Sewer
1,250,000
1,750,000
Martinez Sewer Renovations phase 2
1,200,000
1,325,000
South Orinda Renovations phase 3
1,200,000
1,300,000
08 -09 Development Sewerage
1,180,000
1,180,000
Alhambra Valley Assessment Districts
1,000,000
2,200,000
TV Inspection Program
900,000
5,625,000
Flush Kleen Force Main Renovation
600,000
653,000
Total Collection System Projects <$600,000
3,600,000
33,204,000
Total Collection System Program
$ 22,355,000
$ 72,492,000
2008 -09 Expenditures
Treatment Plant Program
PROJECT
2008/09
Expenditures
Total
Project Cost
Piping Renovations phase 4
$ 1,800,000
$ 1,825,000
Plant Site Improvements
1,500,000
2,122,000
Standby Power Facility Improvements
1,200,000
6,781,000
Primary Structures Demolition
1,100,000
1,400,000
Solids Handling Improvements
1,054,000
6,677,000
Aeration Air Renovations
1,000,000
2,079,000
Scrubber Water Mercury/Metals Removal
1,000,000
20,488,000
Treatment Plant Asset Management
1,000,000
1,208,000
Total Treatment Plant Projects < $1,000,000
3,026,000
36,314,000
Total Treatment Plant Program
$ 12,680,000
$ 78,894,000
2008/09 Expenditures
Recycled Water Program
PROJECT
2008/09
Expenditures
Total
Project Cost
Recycled Water — Pleasant Hill phase 1B
$ 340,000
$ 1,719,000
Total Remaining Recycled Water Projects
65,000
635,000
Total Recycled Water Program
$ 405,000
$ 2,354,000
2008 -09 Expenditures
General Improvements Program
PROJECT
2008 -09
Expenditures
Total
Project Cost
Information Technology Development
$ 720,000
NA
CSOD Facility Improvements
700,000
$ 14,233,000
Vehicle and Equipment Acquisition
700,000
NA
Total General Improvements Projects < $200,000
1,298,000
NA
Total General Improvements Program
$ 3,418,000
Board Role in Capital Program is Ongoing
• Authorize Program Budgets each fiscal year
• Authorize Supplemental Program Funds if needed
• Award Construction Projects > $15,000
• Authorize Construction Change Orders >$50,000
• Authorize Consultant Contracts > $50,000
• Authorize Revisions to Consultant Contracts > 15%
5
Capital Improvement Budget Summary for
2008/09
Questions?
Estimated
FY 2008109
Estimated
Estimated
Total
FY 2008109
Program
Program
Carry-over from
Allocation
Proposed
Expenditures
Prior Fiscal Year
FY 2008109
Authorization
Treatment Plant
$ 12,680,000
$ 16,279,000
$ 10,660,000
$ 26,939,000
Collection System
22,355,000
13,688,000
17,339,000
31,027,000
General Improvements
3,418,000
783,000
3,071,000
3,854,000
Recycled Water
405,000
30,000
399,000
429,000
Total this Fiscal Year 1
$ 38,858,000 1
$ 30,780,000 1
$ 31,469,000
$ 62,249,000
Questions?
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
No.: 6.a. Bids and Awards
Type of Action: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT /AUTHORIZE EXECUTION
OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS /AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENTS
subject: AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO SITEWORKS
CONSTRUCTION, INC., AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS
AND DODSON PSOMAS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WET WEATHER
BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS (PRE -LOAD PHASE), DISTRICT PROJECT 7241
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Gary Rathunde, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
4 O l �A
G. Rathunde A. Antkowiak T. ilecki A. Farrell ames M. K Ily,
general Manager
ISSUE: On April 22, 2008, eleven sealed bids were received and opened for the
construction of the Wet Weather Bypass Improvements (Pre -load Phase), District
Project 7241. The Board of Directors must award the contract or reject bids within 50
days of the bid opening.
RECOMMENDATION: Find that the project is exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), award a construction contract to Siteworks
Construction, Inc., authorize the General Manager to execute the Contract Documents,
and authorize the General Manager to execute an amendment to the Professional
Engineering Services Agreements with Geomatrix Consultants and Dodson Psomas.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $367,400, including design, bid price,
contingency, and construction management.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Reject all bids, which is not recommended.
BACKGROUND: In the early 1990s, the District conducted evaluations and planning
for the relocation of the Basin C discharge point as part of the Wet Weather Overflow
Project and the Basin Discharge Hydraulics Project in an effort to decrease the risk of
overflows from the basins during the wet weather season. Improvements specifically
.recommended from those previous investigations included a new headworks and
expanded disinfection facilities. These improvements have already been implemented.
N: \PESUP \Position Papers\ Rathunde \7241_Award_preload.doc Page 1 of 7
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO SITEWORKS
CONSTRUCTION, INC., AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS
AND DODSON PSOMAS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WET WEATHER
BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS (PRE -LOAD PHASE), DISTRICT PROJECT 7241
An area of focus that has not been addressed is the wet weather bypass system. The
existing bypass point has insufficient capacity during high flows and results in flooding
of properties owned by others. See Attachment 1 for the location of the existing bypass
point.
In November 2005, District staff executed a Professional Engineering Services
agreement with Geomatrix Consultants. Geomatrix Consultants performed soil boring
at the proposed site and prepared a geotechnical report with recommendations.
Concurrent with the geotechnical investigation and evaluation, staff solicited proposals
from four design firms for the design of the bypass structure. In May 2006, District staff
executed a Professional Engineering Services agreement with Dodson Psomas to
prepare design drawings and specifications for the Wet Weather Bypass
Improvements.
The Wet Weather Bypass Improvements will be done in two phases. The main phase
of the project will be bid in the spring of 2009 and will provide necessary improvements
to the emergency wet weather discharge system, such as widening of existing bypass
channels, the gravity overflow structure, and the box culvert to discharge directly to
Walnut Creek. The estimated total construction cost of that phase is $1,000,000. The
current pre -load phase of the project involves using a preload fill to consolidate the soft,
organic clay soils that underlie the site of the new overflow structure. The preloading of
the site will greatly reduce the potential settlement, which if left unmitigated, would take
place over time due to the weight of the new structure. Attachment 1 shows the
location of this project work.
Dodson Psomas and District staff, with the assistance of Geomatrix Consultants,
prepared the plans and specifications for the project. The Engineer's estimate for
construction of the Wet Weather Bypass Improvements (Pre -load Phase) was
$374,000. This first phase of the work was advertised on March 21 and 26, 2008.
Eleven sealed bids ranging from $219,989 to $470,500 were received and publicly
opened on April 22, 2008.
The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial review of the bids
and determined that Siteworks Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsive bidder with a
bid amount of $219,989. A summary of bids received is shown in Attachment 2.
District staff will perform construction management, contract administration, inspection,
survey, office engineering, and submittal review. However, staff recommends retaining
Geomatrix Consultants to provide support services during construction for this project
N:\PESUP \Position Papers\ Rathunde \7241_Award_preload.doc Page 2 of 7
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO SITEWORKS
CONSTRUCTION, INC., AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS
AND DODSON PSOMAS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WET WEATHER
BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS (PRE -LOAD PHASE), DISTRICT PROJECT 7241
because they have expertise in the geotechnical aspects of the project. A contract
amendment for an additional $35,000 has been negotiated with Geomatrix Consultants.
This will bring the total professional service contract with Geomatrix Consultants to
$65,000.
During the design phase, staff and the consultants evaluated various methods to deal
with the soil settlement issues, such as over - excavation, pile supports, and preloading.
It was determined that preloading of the site was the most effective method and would
result in the least long -term maintenance and best long -term performance.
The preparation of a separate set of specifications and drawings by Dodson Psomas for
this pre -load portion of the Wet Weather Bypass Improvements was not included in the
funds approved by the Board on May 4, 2006. Staff recommends increasing the upper
limit on the exiting contract with Dodson Psomas. An agreement amendment for an
additional $18,000 has been negotiated with Dodson Psomas. This will bring the total
professional service contract with Dodson Psomas to $108,000.
The funds required to complete the pre -load phase of this project, as shown in
Attachment 3, are $335,000. The total cost of Wet Weather Bypass Improvements
(Pre -load Phase) is anticipated to be $367,400.
This project is included in the fiscal year 2007 -2008 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB)
on pages TP -84 to TP -86. Staff has determined that there are adequate funds in the
Treatment Plant Program 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
minor alterations to an existing public facility involving negligible or no expansion of use.
Approval of this project will establish the Board of Directors' independent finding that
this project is exempt from CEQA.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Staff recommends the following:
Find that the project is exempt from CEQA,
N:\PESUP \Position Papers\ Rathunde \7241_Award_preload.doc Page 3 of 7
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO SITEWORKS
CONSTRUCTION, INC., AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS
AND DODSON PSOMAS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WET WEATHER
BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS (PRE -LOAD PHASE), DISTRICT PROJECT 7241
2. Award a construction contract in the amount of $219,989 for the construction of
the Wet Weather Bypass Improvements (Pre -load Phase), District Project 7241,
to Siteworks Construction, Inc., the lowest responsive bidder,
3. Authorize the General Manager to execute the Contract Documents,
4. Authorize the General Manager to execute an amendment to an existing
professional service agreement not to exceed $35,000 with Geomatrix
Consultants to review shop drawings and submittals, respond to design
questions, evaluate change order requests, and perform site visits to verify
compliance with the design intent, and
5. Authorize the General Manager to execute an amendment to an existing
professional service agreement not to exceed $18,000 with Dodson Psomas for
the completion of the specifications and plans for the Wet Weather Bypass
Improvements.
N:\PESUP \Position Papers\ Rathunde \7241_Award_preload.doc Page 4 of 7
CULVERT�X i.
R�
0 300
{ LOCATION OF >, A
EXISTNO i
T
LOCATION OF
FUTURE BYPASS PgN
PRELOAD FILL BYPASS
?. �fiTt STRUCTURE €
ENLARGED PLAN ; PNELOAO
BASIN C
BASIN 8 1 YYYl
��i(ii YY to i
y ff £k (y [{ 7
r'
x f'
�Z,�
CLEARWELL _
MUA k_
!2, All
°.
"
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District WET WEATHER BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS ATTACHMENT
DISTRICT PROJECT 7241 1
LOCATION MAP
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7241 Award_preload.doc Page 5 of 7
ATTACHMENT 2
WET WEATHER BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7241
SUMMARY OF BIDS
PROJECT NO.: 7241
DATE/TIME: APRIL 22, 2008/2:00 PM
PROJECT NAME: WET WEATHER BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA ENGINEER EST.: $374,000
NO.
BIDDER
BID PRICE
1
Siteworks Construction
$ 219,988.70
2201 Oak Vale Road
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
2
O. C. Jones & Sons, Inc.
$ 299,900
1520 Fourth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
3
Pacific States Environmental Contractors, Inc.
$ 332,490
11555 Dublin Boulevard
Dubin, CA 94568
4
Sierra Equipment
$ 334,590
8176 County Road 44
Glenn, CA 95943
5
E. E. Gilbert Construction, Inc.
$ 358,588
155 Howe Road
Martinez, CA 94553
6
William G. McCullough Company
$ 360,999
2625 E. 18th Street
Antioch, CA 94531
7
Granite Construction Company
$ 367,980
715 Comstock Street
Santa Clara, CA 95051
8
W. R. Forde Associates
$ 379,000
984 Hensley Street
Richmond, CA 94801 -2117
9
Lister Construction, Inc.
$ 388,000
896 Aldridge Road, Suite B
Vacaville, CA 95688
10
GradeTech, Inc.
$ 418,800
10250 Crow Canyon Road
Castro Valley, CA 94552
11
HSR, Inc.
530 Aldo Avenue
$ 470,500
Santa Clara, CA 95054
BIDS OPENED BY /s/ Elaine Boehme
DATE April 22, 2008
NAPESUP \Position Papers\ Rathunde \7241_Award_preload.doc Page 6 of 7
�
«
_
CL
0
«
0
q
LU
aR
■�
nzd
z
S >LU
0
■
CL
2�
R
�
mLj
�
w
I
LUa
�
3:
LU
�
�
�
U)
w
z
0
�
Q
J
e
U)
z
0
g
LU
i
0
m
A
U)
0
n
\
§
$
0
\
f
§
Q
k
k
�
k
\
4
<
K
609,
_
$\
\7
/
7JLCNOOOI
C*4
g
2
_
0
z
k
§
\
\
CD
co
z
b
02
\
±
S (D
§
\
®
\
\
/
°
/
0
3
E
{'
o
E
/
i'
g
3
7\
_
2D
2 @
7
2
t5 =
M/�
o
°°
/
m 0-
\
o
®
o�
Ee
.«
E
m
tam
z
<
�f
ca
m
ƒ 2
0
S
\0
3°.
/m0
2
0
k2 §
/
(�
o
_�\
$23
u o r
�� \
z
0<
W
CL
\ f
Q
2
2(D
02
{
wo \
I
I
{ 7
§
LL2t
3k�
5§
Ira
w\ k
E
u�
z/
m�
2
7«@
\§&
CL
�
�a
F-
00
a \\
k (D�
C:)
\
\@
z
ooq
z
o q
boom
z
k§
/k
0
C6 s m
0
a m
(6�
O
D
00
Q
0
= m
e
LL
< Q
t
FiT-
04 n # r c
�
2
\
_
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: 6.b. Bids and Awards
Type of Action: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT /AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
subject. AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO NCCI, INC. AND AUTHORIZE
THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT, DISTRICT
PROJECT 7207
Submitted By Initiating Dept /Div.:
Gary Rathunde, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
G. Rathunde A. Antkowiak T. ki A. Farrell K. Alm James M.
General Mana er
ISSUE: On April 24, 2008, seven sealed bids were received and opened for the
construction of the Aeration Air Renovations Project, District Project 7207. The Board
of Directors must award the contract or reject bids within 50 days of the bid opening.
RECOMMENDATION: Find that the project is exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), award a construction contract to NCCI, Inc., and
authorize the General Manager to execute the Contract Documents.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $1,963,500, including design, bid price,
contingency, and construction management.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Reject all bids, which is not recommended.
BACKGROUND: The aeration basins have experienced air leaks from the floor of the
air plenum boxes for many years. In 2002, District Project 6157, Aeration Air Leaks
Damage Assessment, investigated the condition of air headers and branch lines around
the aeration tanks and the condition of the air plenum boxes and floor slabs under the
aeration basins. Air leaks in the branch lines, couplings, and concrete encasement
were identified and repaired.
The Aeration Air Renovations Project continued the investigation into potential repair
methods to improve the reliability of the in -tank air delivery system for the aeration
process. Air leaks through gaps and cracks in the construction joints and the
expansion joints in the aeration tanks have been repaired. However, additional
cracking in the bottom of the air plenum boxes is allowing compressed air to leak out
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_ final (2).doc Page 1 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO NCCI, INC. AND AUTHORIZE
THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT, DISTRICT
PROJECT 7207
into the base rock below the structure and eventually migrate back to the atmosphere
through various openings around the perimeter of the A/N Tanks. Based on
contractor's demonstration projects, staff recommends further repair of all air plenum
boxes using a pressure grouting method. This would seal the cracking within the
structure's foundation slab in addition to filling any voids in the underlying base rock to
increase stability of the structure. Attachment 1 shows the location of this project work.
District staff prepared the plans and specifications for the project. The Engineer's
estimate for construction of Aeration Air Renovations Project is $1,600,000. The
project was advertised on April 4 and 10, 2008. Seven bids ranging from $1,429,972 to
$2,743,310 were received and publicly opened on April 24, 2008. A summary of bids
received is shown in Attachment 2.
The repair work on the aeration tank air plenum boxes cannot be completed during a
single dry weather season. The bid forms included a base bid schedule for the work to
be completed during the summer of 2008. This schedule was used as a basis to
compare bids to determine the lowest responsive bidder. An additive bid schedule
requested costs from the bidders for the repair work the District may elect to have
constructed during the summer of 2009. The bid prices for the additional work ranged
from $1,538,263 to $2,981,770. Attachment 3 shows a summary of the base bid and
the additive bid prices.
The District has until October 1, 2008 to award this additional work. Staff will review the
effectiveness and efficiency of the construction work by NCCI Inc. this summer and, if
favorable, come back to the Board in September to request award of this additional
work and a supplemental allocation of funds.
On May 1, 2008, the second low bidder, Valentine Corporation, submitted a timely bid
protest claiming the bid submitted by NCCI, Inc. included a subcontractor, Ashron
Construction and Restoration, Inc. ( Ashron), who is not qualified to perform the
specified coating work. On May 9, 2008, Valentine Corporation withdrew its bid protest
(see Attachment 4).
The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial review of the
apparent low bid of $1,429,972 submitted by NCCI, Inc. and concluded that Ashron,
NCCI's first tier subcontractor, will supervise, warrantee, and self - perform the cleaning
and surface preparation for the air plenum box coating work. A second tier
subcontractor, KC Industries, Inc., which does meet the specified District requirements
regarding years of experience, job history, and manufacturer's certification, will perform
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_ final (2).doc Page 2 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO NCCI, INC. AND AUTHORIZE
THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT, DISTRICT
PROJECT 7207
the application of the polyurea coatings. Therefore, District staff concludes that NCCI's
bid meets all contract requirements and is the lowest responsive bid.
The District will perform construction management, contract administration, inspection,
office engineering, and submittal review. The funds required to complete the first of two
phases of the construction project, as shown in Attachment 5, are $1,843,500. The
total cost of this phase of the Aeration Air Renovations Project is anticipated to be
$1,963,500.
This project is included in the fiscal year 2007 -2008 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB)
on pages TP -35 to TP -37. Staff has determined that there are adequate funds in the
Treatment Plant Program 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
only alterations of existing facilities with negligible or no expansion of capacity.
Authorization of the construction contract for this project will establish the Board of
Directors' independent finding that the project is exempt from CEQA.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Staff recommends the following:
Find that the project is exempt from CEQA,
2. Award a construction contract in the amount of $1,429,972 for the construction of
the Aeration Air Renovations Project, District Project 7207, to NCCI Inc., the
lowest responsive bidder, and authorize the General Manager to execute the
Contract Documents.
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_ final (2).doc Page 3 of 8
Sanitary District
" - tl= Project Location
AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT ATTACHMENT
DISTRICT PROJECT 7207 1
LOCATION MAP
WPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_ final (2).doc Page 4 of 8
D
,
f C
� ;; Aeration Tanks
I
El
i
K
-Z
L
Sanitary District
" - tl= Project Location
AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT ATTACHMENT
DISTRICT PROJECT 7207 1
LOCATION MAP
WPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_ final (2).doc Page 4 of 8
ATTACHMENT 2
AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7207
SUMMARY OF BIDS
PROJECT NO.: 7207 DATE/TIME: APRIL 24, 2008/2:00 PM
PROJECT NAME: AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT
PROJECT MANAGER: GARY E. RATHUNDE
PROJECT LOCATION: MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA ENGINEER EST.: $1,600,000
NO.
BIDDER
BID PRICE
1
NCCI, Inc.
$ 1,429,972
Pier 26 The Embarcadero
San Francisco, CA 94105
2
Valentine
$1,438,263
111 Pelican Way
San Rafael, CA 94901
3
D. W. Nicholson Corporation
$ 1,528,000
24747 Clawiter Road
Hayward, CA 94545
4
F. D. Thomas, Inc.
$ 1,595,288
217 Bateman Drive
Central Point, Or 97502
5
Pacific Infrastructure
$ 1,640,000
2134 Rheem Drive, Suite C
Pleasanton, Ca 94588
6
Berkeley Engineering Co.
$1,690,980
2254 Willow Avenue
Bay Point, CA 94565
7
ABHE & Svoboda, Inc.
$ 2,743,310
17066 Revere Way
Prior Lake, MN 55372
BIDS OPENED BY /s/ Elaine Boehme DATE April 24, 2008
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_final (2).doc Page 5 of 8
ATTACHMENT 3
AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7207
SUMMARY OF ADDITIVE BID PRICES
NO.
BIDDER
BASE BID
ADDITIVE BID
TOTAL BID
PRICE
PRICES
PRICE
1
NCCI, Inc.
$1,429,972
$1!, „566,448
$2,996,420
Pier 26 The Embarcadero
San Francisco, CA 94105
2
Valentine
$1,438,263
$11,538,263
$2,976,526
111 Pelican Way
San Rafael, CA 94901
3
D. W. Nicholson Corporation
$1,528,000
$1',900,000
$3,428,000
24747 Clawiter Road
Hayward, CA 94545
4
F. D. Thomas, Inc.
$1,595,288
$11,675,000
$3,270,288
217 Bateman Drive
Central Point, Or 97502
5
Pacific Infrastructure
$1,640,000
$11,836,800
$3,476,800
2134 Rheem Drive, Suite C
Pleasanton, Ca 94588
6
Berkeley Engineering Co.
$1,690,980
$f,750,000
$3,440,980
2254 Willow Avenue
Bay Point, CA 94565
7
ABHE & Svoboda, Inc.
$2,743,310
$21,981,770
$5,725,080
17066 Revere Way
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Note: As shown above, where an additive bid schedule is included, the lowest
responsive bidder for the base bid may not be the lowest bidder for the base bid
plus the additive bid schedule. If the District chose to pursue the additional work,
it would still award the project on the basis of the base bid, even though the total
project cost of the base bid plus additional bid schedule may be higher.
N:\PESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_Award_ final (2).doc Page 6 of 8
Gary Rathunde - Aeration Improvements Page 1
Attachment 4
From: "Bob Valentine" <BValentine @valentinecorp.com>
To: "Gary Rathunde" <GRATH U ND@centralsan. dst.ca. us>
Date: 5/9/2008 10:05:26 AM
Subject: Aeration Improvements
Gary,
After consultation with our attorney, we decided is not in out best
interest to continue to pursue our protest of NCCI's bid. We do not feel
that a hearing will change the District's mind, and we recognize that
our only avenue would be legal action, which we consider to be a poor
investment of our time and money for this protest, which is very
subjective.
Good luck with your project. We appreciate your time and consideration
in this matter.
Sincerely,
Robert 0. Valentine Jr., P.E.
Valentine Corporation
PH 415 453 -3732 x24
FX 415 457 -5820
bvalentine @valentinecorp.com
CC: "Bill Barend" <BBarend @valentinecorp.com>
Page 7 Of 8
ATTACHMENT
AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS PROJECT
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 7207
POST - BID /PRE- CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
No.
Item Description
Amounts
% Construction Cost
1
CONSTRUCTION
a. Construction Contract
$1,429,972
b. Contingency at 15%
$214,528
SUBTOTAL- CONSTRUCTION COST
$1,644,500
100%
2
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
a. District Forces
- Construction Management and Inspection
$184,000
- Operations Department Support
$20,000
SUBTOTAL - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
$204,000
12%
3
PREBID EXPENDITURES
a. District Forces
$75,500
b. Contractor Demonstration Projects
$39,500
SUBTOTAL - PREBID EXPENDITURES
$115,000
7%
4
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$1,963,500
5
FUNDS AUTHORIZED TO DATE
$120,000
6
ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION NEEDED TO
COMPLETE PROJECT (Line 4 - Line 5)
$1,843,500
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7207 protest \7207_AttacM Page 8 of 8
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
7.a. Items Held Over From Previous
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008 No.: Board Meetings
Type of Action: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT /AUTHORIZE AGREEMENTS
subject: AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO C. OVERAA COMPANY,
AUTHORIZE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH ANTI ARCHITECTS
AND ENGINEERS (ATI) AND MONTGOMERY WATSON HARZA (MWH), AND
AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE STANDBY POWER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 7248.
Submitted By: Initiating Dept./Div.:
Tom Godsey, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
T. Godsey A. Antkowiak T. FlMecki
ME*
A. Farrell
61 /"
James M. I elly,
General Manager
ISSUE: On April 21, 2008, eight (8) sealed bids were received and opened for
construction of the Standby Power Facility Improvements Project, District Project 7248.
The Board of Directors must award the contract or reject bids within 50 days of the bid
opening. Authorization of the Board of Directors is required for the General Manager to
execute professional service agreements in an amount greater than $50,000.
RECOMMENDATION: Award a construction contract, authorize professional service
agreements, and authorize the General Manager to execute the Contract Documents.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $5,667,000 including design, !bid price,
contingency, consultants and construction management.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Reject all bids, which is not recommended.
2. The professional services agreements with ATI and MWH are for construction
support services (shop drawing review, responding to design clarifications,
evaluate change order requests, and perform site visits). The (District does not
have the staff available to provide these services.
N: \PESUP \Position Papers \Godsey \7248 - Award- draft3.doc Page 1 of 6
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO C. OVERAA & COMPANY,
AUTHORIZE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH ATI ARCHITECTS
AND ENGINEERS (ATI) AND MONTGOMERY WATSON HARZA (MWH), AND
AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE STANDBY POWER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 7248.
BACKGROUND: The Standby Power Facility built in 1993, is equipped with two Detroit
Diesel 1.6 megawatt diesel engine driven generators (See Attachment 1 for Project
Location). The California Air Resources Board has recently restricted allowable
particulate emissions from diesel engines for non - emergency operations. The new
restrictions will not allow acceptable operations and maintenance testing of the Standby
Power Facility with the existing engines. Staff analyzed retrofitting the existing diesel
engines with particulate filters but the filters would still not allow sufficient operations
and maintenance testing time. Staff also evaluated reliability of the existing engines
and determined that replacement engines offered significant reliability improvements.
The project scope also includes bringing the facility building up to 1997 Uniform
Building Code seismic standards and improving the dependability of the plant power
system.
Plans and specifications for this project were produced by ATI, MWH, and District staff.
The Engineer's estimate of construction costs was $5,500,000. The project was
advertised on March 13 and 19 of 2008. Eight (8) bids, ranging from $3,693,000 to
$5,298,286, were received and publicly opened on April 21, 2008. A summary of these
bids is shown on Attachment 2. Staff conducted a commercial and technical evaluation
of these bids and has determined that C. Overaa & Company is the lowest responsive
bidder with a bid amount of $3,693,000. The C. Overaa & Company bid is based on the
submittal of Detroit Diesel engines.
District staff will perform construction management, contract administration, and
construction inspection. Staff recommends engaging ATI and MWH to provide support
services during construction for this project because both consultants helped prepare
the plans and specifications and, therefore, have a solid understanding of the project
design. The construction support services include reviewing shop drawings and
submittals, responding to design questions, evaluating change order requests, and
performing site visits to verify compliance with the design intent. Construction support
services contracts with a cost ceiling of $75,000 and $150,000 have been negotiated
with ATI and MWH respectively. The funds required to complete this project, as shown
in Attachment 3 are $5,227,000. The total cost of the Standby Power Facility
Improvements is anticipated to be $5,667,000.
The Standby Power Facility Improvements Project is included in the Fiscal Year
2007 -08 Capital Improvement Budget, pages TP -106 through TP -108. Staff has
conducted cash -flow analysis of the Treatment Plant Program and concluded that
adequate funds are available for this project.
N:\PESUP \Position Papers \Godsey \7248 - Award- draft3.doc Page 2 of 6
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject: AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO C. OVERAA & COMPANY,
AUTHORIZE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH ATI ARCHITECTS
AND ENGINEERS (ATI) AND MONTGOMERY WATSON HARZA (MWH), AND
AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE STANDBY POWER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 7248.
At its September 1, 2005 meeting, the District Board of Directors found the Standby
Power Facility Improvements Project to be exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Staff recommends the following:
Award a construction contract in the amount of $3,693,000 for
construction of the Standby Power Facility Improvements Project, District
Project 7248, to C. Overaa & Company, the lowest responsible and
responsive bidder, and authorize the General Manager to execute the
Contract Documents.
2. Authorize the General Manager to execute a professional service
agreement not to exceed $75,000 with ATI to review shop drawings and
submittals, respond to design questions, evaluate change order requests,
and perform site visits to verify compliance with the design intent.
3. Authorize the General Manager to execute a professional service
agreement not to exceed $150,000 with MWH to review shop drawings
and submittals, respond to design questions, evaluate change order
requests, and perform site visits to verify compliance with the design
intent.
NAPESUP \Position Papers \Godsey \7248 - Award- draft3.doc Page 3 of 6
0
0 150 300
FEET
0(� O
14,
/ 1
v
O '
Warehouse �m
�l \� 8
WE
Satw ens
h�-
0
C
/
/
/
PROJECT
SITES
a
QQ
o /
e Central Contra costa STANDBY POWER FACILITY Attachment
Sanitary District
IMPROVEMENTS
District Project 7248
Project Location
u
Page 4 of 6
Attachment 2
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
SUMMARY OF BIDS
PROJECT NO.: 7248 DATEITIME: APRIL 21, 2008
PROJECT NAME: STANDBY POWER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
PROJECT MANAGER: TOM GODSEY
PROJECT LOCATION: MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA ENGINEER EST.: $5,500,000
NO.
BIDDER
BID PRICE
1
C. Overaa & Company
$ 3,693,000
200 Parr Blvd.
Richmond, CA 94801
510- 234 -0926
2
L. L. Christian Construction, Inc.
$ 3,806,700
5070 Robert J. Mathews Parkway
Suite 100
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
916- 939 -9750
3
Anderson Pacific Construction Company, Inc.
$ 4,011,088
1390 Norman Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95054
408 - 970 -9900
4
Helix Electric, Inc.
$ 4,185,000
8260 Camino Santa Fe
San Diego, CA 92121
858 - 623 -1429
5
ProVen Management, Inc.
$ 4,242,414
706 Sansom Street
San Francisco, CA 95111
415 -421 -9500
6
Ryan Company
$ 4,368,000
25 Constitution Drive
Taunton, Ma 02780
508 - 742 -2517
7
D. W. Nicholson Corporation
$ 4,575,000
24747 Clawiter Road
Hayward, CA 94540
510- 887 -0900
8
Valentine Corporation
$5,298,286
111 Pelican Way
San Rafael, CA 94901
415- 453 -3732
BIDS OPENED BY /s/ Elaine Boehme DATE: April 21, 2008
N:\PESUP \Position Papers \Godsey \7248 - Award- draft3.doc Page 5 of 6
H
W
n
0 W
W 1-.
CL
00
U)
M ti W
>00
h"�ZU
H
W W
O
C.) W Z
Q�a0
U
LLJ
Q LL V w
a
�
uii
m
a y
O
m a
0
Q
H
N
O
U
C
O
V
*.-10
ti
O
�p
N
�
C
O
U
0
O
O
CD
O
O
CR
to
,6
Ld
CD
N
O
O
O
c
LO
c
0
Re
co
E
40
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
o
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
o
0
M
O
O)
W
O
O
O
O
O
1n
O
G)
N
M
to
1n
%
T-
1-
0
co
r
at
ER
f,
04
T-
40
4a
40
�
eo
V
EF}
=
O
W
1--
*'
f-
W
J
N
z
CL
.r—
w
2
V
U
Q
c z
O
ci
O
c
0 Q
w
°w
=
O
U
d
0
a
Q.
.�
z
O
Z
y
H z
O
H
p
w
w
v
.�
z
Q
z
N
p
N
o
°o\
U
w
=
++ U
a
O
z^
00
=
0
Co
�
O
W
(n
X
p
H
F= m
d
U=
N
z
N
O
C N
w
D
0
Q U C J
O
C>
0
z
O
�
O
m z
W
W
N
�
=
v
Co
_
H
U
0--
�O
LL
m
z
wm
L
w
p
=
H
_
-j
H
v
N
=0o
=
as
=a
m
a
x
=a
w
_
•-
a�
N
1
9
1
o
cn
w
zF -
�UinUO
wo
U
O
p
=O
co
Ouu
z
ca
ci
z
co
w
ed
m
H
z
00
v
V
a
co
U
Qa
6
r
N
M
.4
O
(O
to
4-
O
CD
N
m
f6
CL
cc3
3
4
hN
V
OO
4
lz
a
d
N
O
C)
E
0
L
W
d
R
0
N
N
El
00
O
O
N
c�
►i
(1)
a
0
U
(f)
V
N
�O
L
■ ■
w
06
0
CL
70
c
cz
-I",
•— c
cn
o
C
.MMMMMI U
C
c� cn
cn O
.0
cz
O �
. C: �.
O �
U U
U cn
i CD
cn
cn
o ox
w
E
M
U
70
O
U
.0
E
cn
cn
^E
W
cz
cn
c
•—
.�
^
•
^�1
cn
V �/ )
O
U
cz
O
cn
I....
O
cm
O
o
C:
oU
c
O
O
.-
CZ
cn
cn
CD
-C
E
U
•—
4-a
•—
O
cn
cz
>
•—
Q
>
O
�Q
m
O
N
0)
c:
U
O
.0
C:
0
X
U
CZ
},
U
�
O
U
3;
U
U
U
�
—
�,--a
CZ
0
�
o
cz
cr
U
a
a
■ ■
w
06
0
CL
70
c
cz
-I",
•— c
cn
o
C
.MMMMMI U
C
c� cn
cn O
.0
cz
O �
. C: �.
O �
U U
U cn
i CD
cn
cn
o ox
w
E
M
U
70
O
U
.0
E
cn
cn
ui
oC
•
TI
N
L
Q
O
4�
0
m
■
U
4�
L
cn
l0
x
to
■
L
O
fo
CL
CL
f O
ca O
fo O
L \
� M
ot%o
M
U 4d -
■
4-J
-
O
4-%
C.
V)
moo
fu
fu
L
4�
0
U
■
"
�J
C
C
W
7@
N
D
L
0
i
O
V
fu
L.
O
V
U1
O
V
fo
L.
O
U
V)
Q
>^
-1-+
70
0
O
�-
ACL U
-0°
a)°
°d�
~>'0��OO'E�
.0
.�..r
0
a.
�
-� U)
i
Q
vs
co
�
>,�
U
o�v
c�
���
.—
F—
•— •-
U°�
o
°CZ�
��_��`n�
o��
U��
L-_
p
+r
4--o
c
0)
O
a.
i 0°
0 i
>
0
U j
W
> U)
I
cz
0^
cra
c
co
U
E
�..
C/)
O
O
cz
O
°
>
L.LI
0
cz
Cl.
�7C)
C� o
�
w �
U
=U
>
_
a�
U
V
�O
N
W
R
V
cz
UL
i
O
d.
cz
U)
cz
O
cz
O
O-♦i-
A
E
E
�
L
C•
C:
T
�
a�
>
00
CZ
00
�
�
VO
C:
4-j
V
U.
O
CZ
Co
n
C
C:
C;)
O
U
�Q
CZ
I
CZ
00
3:
00
Q
UN
c
O
U
c
k",
13
cz
w
O
CD
O
E
�
N
C•
C:
i
�
a�
o
V
�
O
cn
O
W
cn
Co
_�
Q--a cz
E
a� d n
w
O
CD
�
N
C•
C:
a�
o
Q--a cz
E
a� d n
rNE m
(A
C
O
4mj
N
CY
a
8.a.1) Reports
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
May 1, 2008
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
VIA: JAMES M. KELLY, GENERAL MANAGER"'
J
FROM: ANN E. FARRELL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DISTRICT POLICY ON THE INSTALLATION OF
OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES
As part of the ongoing District Code revisions, the Code section addressing the
requirement for overflow protection devices (OPD) is being reviewed. Staff has
prepared this memorandum to review the history of District requirements related to
overflow protection devices, present information on OPD requirements by other
agencies, estimate the number of homes without OPD's and the estimated cost of
installing such devices, report the dollar amount of previous losses related to overflows,
and propose a range of alternatives for further discussion by the Board.
HISTORY
The District Code first incorporated the requirement for overflow protection devices
(OPD) in October of 1960. At that time, the OPD was required only where topography
was such that an overflow could occur from the public main into /onto private property.
This was defined as when the drain in the lowest floor of a structure on the property is
lower than the nearest upstream manhole. (The attached flier from the Town of Los
Gatos web site is a good example of a similar OPD requirement with an excellent
explanation and graphic.)
In June of 1996 the OPD requirement was strengthened to say that no person shall
install or repair a side sewer which is connected to the District sewer without installing
an OPD. So, the OPD requirement was expanded to all properties, but only when
installing a new sewer or repairing an existing sewer. The elevation, requirement was
dropped even though it is unlikely that an overflow from a public maim will occur to a
property where the drains are higher than the nearest upstream manhole. The thinking
was that an OPD on all properties, regardless of elevation, has the added benefit of
protecting the properties from overflows caused by obstructions in their own lateral, if
those obstructions are downstream of the OPD.
CADocuments and Settings \afarrell \Desktop \OPD White Paper_l.doc
In July of 2003, in response to a large overflow claim which may have been mitigated by
the proper installation of an OPD, the District Code was extensively modified to make it
stronger. A provision was added to say that the District would not be responsible for
damages if sewage overflowed into a home without an OPD. In addition, the language
was changed to say that all property owners shall install an OPD (not just new
installations or repairs). At that time, staff initiated an intensive outreach effort, working
with local realtor and home inspection groups to provide information on the benefits of
recommending installation of an OPD to their clients.
In addition to the requirements in the District Code, the District has taken other
actions over the years to encourage the use of OPD's. The following table lists all such
actions taken by the District.
YEAR
OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICE ACTIVITY
1955
OPD installation at certain houses suggested by ins a tors.
1959
Districtspecifications require OPD for certain elevation conditions.
1960
OPD "mushroom" device patented by District.
1960
District Code requires OPD's for certain elevation conditions.
1960's
OPD's noted on District permits.
1970's
OPD's noted on District maps.
1985
CSO installs OPD's in problem areas
1993
Districtspecifications call for OPD's on all new and repaired connections.
1996
District Code requires OPD's on all new and repaired connections.
2003
District Code strengthened to require OPD's on all connections and to
make property owners responsible for any damages resulting from a
sewage overflow inside their property if an OPD is not installed.
Intensive outreach effort conducted.
The proposed Code revisions for OPD's are attached. At the time the Ad Hoc Code
Review Committee reviewed this Code section, information on the practices of other
agencies and the cost: benefit ratio for installation of OPD's at all properties had not
been developed. With this additional information, the Board now has the opportunity to
direct staff to modify the OPD requirements as they see fit.
UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE
The Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) has had the same requirement for many years and
it reads as follows:
710.1 Where a fixture is installed on a floor level that is lower than the next upstream
manhole cover of the public or private sewer, serving such drainage piping, shall be
protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved type of backwater
valve. Fixtures on floor levels above such elevation shall not discharge through the
backwater valve.
CADocuments and Settings\afarrell \Desktop \OPD White Paper 1.doc
Thus, the UPC requires backflow protection only where the elevation of the property
dictates a need. This is consistent with the original District Code provision from 1960.
POLICIES OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Staff conducted a phone survey of over 50 agencies and received responses from 40.
There were many differences and many similarities between programs. There are
many possible features and each program had some combination of those features.
Possible OPD requirement features include the following:
• All new sewer connections, regardless of elevation
• All repaired sewer connections, regardless of elevation
• Only repaired sewer connection for properties of a certain size or certain
magnitude remodel
• Only new and /or repaired sewer connections meeting certain elevation
criteria
• All properties where a sewer overflow has occurred
• Any property where agency staff determines a device is needed (usually
due to elevation criteria)
• Point of sale requirement
• Retroactive requirement for all connections
• Retroactive requirement for only properties meeting certain elevation
criteria
The following is a table that summarizes the findings, with some assumptions made to
simplify the responses and allow characterization:
SURVEY ITEM
RESPONSES
#
Total # of Responders
40
100%
Responders with no OPD requirement
13
33%
Responders with OPD requirement
27
67%
Of 27 responders with OPD requirement
_
Required for all new /repaired sewers
(regardless of elevation
14
(35 %)
Required based on elevation only
13
33%
Required based on previous overflow
Union SD, Napa SD, Pacifica, Burlingame)
4
(10 %)
Required at point of sale
(Albany, Burlingame, Richmond, West County SD, Ste a SD
5
(13 %)
Retroactive for all properties
Richmond, Marin Cty SD #5, Ora Loma SD, Tamal ais CSD, West C!Y SD
5
(13 %)
Property owner responsible for all damages if no OPD
San Mateo Ct , Marin Cty DS #5
2
(5 %)
CADocuments and Settings\afarrell \Desktop \OPD White Paper 1.doc
ESTIMATE OF HOMES WITHOUT OPD'S AND COST TO COMPLY
It is somewhat difficult to estimate the number of properties without OPD's. But, staff
has prepared an estimate making some educated assumptions, such as only homes
built before 1960 should be without OPD's, and believes a reasonable estimate would
be approximately 34,000 properties in the service area do not have OPD's. Assuming a
range of costs from $250 per property for 80% of the properties to $5000 per property
for 2% of the homes, with several steps in between, a cost of approximately $14 million
to retrofit all remaining properties without OPD's was estimated. If the retrofit
requirement were limited to homes with an elevation situation that dictated the need for
device, a very cursory estimate is that only about 25% of the 34,000 properties would
be impacted and the retrofit costs would be reduced to $3.5 million.
RECORD OF HISTORICAL OVERFLOW LOSS CLAIMS
The cost of sewage overflow claims has varied significantly from year to year. One or
two serious overflows can dramatically increase the overflow losses paid in any given
year. A table showing historical overflows follows.
FISCAL YEAR
TOTAL OVERFLOW CLAIM LOSSES
2006 -07
$19,912.
2005 -06
$ 66,5,'26.
2004 -05
$138,Q18.
2003 -04
$586,578.
2002 -03
$ 92,8162.
2001 -02
$265,336.
2000 -01
$151,642.
Seven Year Average
$188,728.
As shown above, the average annual loss payment for overflows over this period of time
has been approximately $190,000 per year. The current fiscal year is estimated to be
somewhat higher than average due to the Kaiser Hospital overflow and has not been
included in the figures as the Kaiser situation is not typical of those that could be
prevented with an overflow device.
COST /BENEFIT OF RETROACTIVE REQUIREMENT TO INSTALL OPD'S
If it is assumed that the installation of OPD's on all properties would eliminate all
property damage from overflows, then the payback can be calculated by dividing the
total estimated retrofit cost of $14 million by the potential savings of $190,000 per year.
The pay back period is thus calculated to be about 74 years. If only the properties with
an elevation situation that presents a real risk are retrofitted, and those properties are
assumed to represent 25 % of the properties without OPD's, then the retrofit cost can
be reduced to $3.5 million and the payback reduced to about 18 years. The 25%
assumption has not been verified by a detailed check of the areas where pre -1960
CADocuments and Settings\afarrell \Desktop \OPD White Paper 1.doc
homes exist. If this data is critical to the Board's decision, staff could invest effort in
doing a more accurate estimate and bring that information back to the Board.
OPD POLICY ALTERNATIVES
A series of OPD policy alternatives have been developed, ranging from least
conservative to most conservative (i.e. most protective of the District). They are as
follows:
1) No OPD requirement
2) OPD required only where elevation criteria apply for new construction
3) OPD required for all new construction
4) OPD required only where elevation criteria apply for new construction and repairs
5) OPD required for all new construction and repairs
6) OPD required only where elevation criteria apply for new construction and repairs
and on point of sale
7) OPD required for all new construction and repairs and on point of sale
8) OPD required retroactively for all properties where elevation criteria apply or
where an overflow has occurred and for all new construction and repairs going
forward
9) OPD required retroactively and going forward for all properties
DISCUSSION
The OPD has two potential benefits. One, in most cases it can protect a property with a
drain lower than the nearest upstream manhole from an overflow caused by a backup in
the main sewer. (In a small amount of cases, the backup may be of such a flow and or
pressure that it overwhelms the capacity of the OPD.) Two, the OPD has the added
benefit of protecting a property from sewage backing up from a blockage in its own
lateral, if the blockage occurs downstream of the OPD. The OPD, if installed at the time
a new sewer is installed or when a sewer is being repaired, is relatively inexpensive,
typically around $250. Therefore, it seems reasonable to require OPD's on all
properties where a sewer is being installed or repaired, whether or not elevation dictates
a need to protect the District from potentially damaging the property. The added benefit
of potentially protecting the property from a backup in its own lateral !seems to be worth
this expense.
When making the requirement retroactive for all properties, however the District is
imposing a requirement on some properties that is not dictated by a need to protect the
property from the District main. It could be argued that the property owner should have
the choice of whether to install an OPD solely to protect himself from a blockage in his
own lateral or to wait for a blockage and call the plumber. In cases Where the
installation of an OPD is costly, it may be cheaper for the property owner to call a
plumber on occasion.
CADocuments and Settings\afarrell \Desktop \OPD White Paper 1.doc
It does appear to be a legitimate use of District authority to require installation of OPD's
for properties where the elevation criteria dictate that the property could sustain an
overflow from the public main. In these cases, the decrease in risk may justify the cost
of retroactively installing an OPD, even on properties where the cost is relatively high.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends alternative number eight, OPD required retroactively for all properties
where elevation criteria apply or where an overflow has occurred and for all new sewer
construction and sewer repairs going forward. With this approach, the retroactive
provision is applied only to those properties that have a real risk of experiencing a
sewage overflow from a public main.
To ease the burden of the retroactive provision to install OPD's for homes that are at
risk due to elevation criteria, a multi -year implementation period is suggested with an
intensive outreach program. The District could also consider providing some funding to
assist with implementation. Funding options could include grants of 'a certain amount
per property or a financing plan for those properties where installation of an OPD
presents a financial hardship. The multi -year implementation period would allow time
for staff and the Board to develop and implement outreach and financial assistance
programs. If this approach is acceptable, staff will develop the approach further for the
Board's consideration.
CADocuments and Settings\afarrell \Desktop \OPD White Paper 1.doc
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
110 E. MAIN STREET
Los GATOS, CA 95031
Do You Need A
Backwater Valve?
Damage and inconvenience due to a sewage backup can be prevented or significantly reduced with the
installation of a backwater valve. If a structure has a plumbing fixture below the public sewer system,
a backwater valve can help stop sewage from backing up into your business or home when the public
system has a blockage. A properly installed backwater valve works on a one -way system; sewage can
go out, but not back in, therefore, preventing damage to your property.
Not all homes or commercial buildings need a backflow valve. New structures, new installation or
alterations of plumbing fixtures require the installation of a backwater valve if the lowest finished floor
elevation is less than one foot above the uphill manhole cover of the public sewer system. Existing
homes or commercial buildings located in older parts of Los Gatos may have been constructed or had
plumbing repairs completed before the requirement of a backwater valve and may need backflow
protection. Los Gatos Town Code section 22.20.055(b) provides that the Town is not liable for
damage resulting from a sewer overflow where the property owner or other person has failed to install
and maintain a backflow valve.
The Town suggests that while you are working on your plumbing system you have your plumber or
West Valley Sanitation District investigate your property to see if a backwater valve is necessary to
protect your property. Although the costs can vary, the one -time cost may save your personal property
and help eliminate potential unnecessary hardships.
West Valley Sanitation District (408) 378 -2407 or www.westvalleysan.org
N:\DEV\FORMS\Building\Backwatervalves.wpd
OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICE MEMO
APPENDICES
CODE CHAPTER 9.15 OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES DRAFT
CODE CHAPTER 9.15 OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES
STRIKEOUT
Chapter 9.15
OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES
9.15.010 Overflow protection devices.
A. Findings. The District finds that overflow protection devices are necessary
to minimize the volume of sewage overflows and flooding of public and private premises,
protect the health and safety of the District, its residents and visitors and the environment,
and to minimize damage to District and private property. Proper installation and maintenance
of overflow protection devices by property owners and long term leaseholders of residential,
industrial and commercial properties constitute an integral part of the private and public
sewage collection system designed to convey sewage from buildings throughout the District
to the treatment plant. Failure of property owners and long term leaseholders to properly
install and maintain overflow protection devices can prevent the proper functioning of the
sewage collection system as designed.
B. Mandatory Installation and Maintenance. All property owners and long term
leaseholders shall install and maintain a overflow protection device on any side sewer that is
connected, or is intended for connection to, the District's sewer system. This requirement
applies to all such persons, regardless of whether they acquired the serviced property before
or after the date of formal adoption of this Chapter. In this Code, the term "overflow
protection device" includes both overflow protection devices and backwater check valves and
shutoff systems, and any other devices the District may approve from time to time for such
purposes. All overflow protection devices shall comply with the requirements of the Standard
Specifications and shall be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as
designed.
1. New Side Sewer Installations, 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 overflow protection
device of the type and in the manner prescribed in the Standard Specifications and the permit
requirements included in Title 5 of this Code, except as provided for in Section 9.15.020.
2. Maintenance Requirements. All overflow protection devices shall be
maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. All overflow protection
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
overflow protection devices.
3. Elevation and Sizing Requirements. All overflow protection devices shall be
installed at an elevation and of a size that protects the property from damage. It is the
property owner's or long term leaseholder's responsibility to either confirm that the overflow
protection device is at the proper elevation and size, or to obtain competent assistance from
a licensed plumber or contractor to confirm its proper elevation and size. If any subsequent
modification of the property results in the overflow protection device being undersized or at
an improper elevation, the property owner or long term leaseholder shall adjust or replace the
overflow protection device to the proper elevation and /or size.
C. Failure to Follow the Overflow Protection Device Requirements. Any property
owner or long term leaseholder whose property has no overflow protection device, or has a
defective or improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device, shall be
responsible for all damage that results from the lack of such an overflow protection device, or
the failure of a defective or improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device to
prevent such damage. Should it be determined that property damage is sustained as the
result of overflow protection device located at an improper elevation, the property owner or
long term leaseholder shall be responsible for any such damage. (Ord. 226 § 2, 2003: Ord.
198 § 3(Exh. C(part)), 1996)
9.15.020 Limited exceptions to requirement for overflow
protection devices.
A. Findings Regarding Exception Requests. The District finds that some property
owners or long term leaseholders may prefer to apply for an exception to the requirements
herein for installation of a overflow protection device, or that it may be particularly onerous
technically, financially or aesthetically for some properties where overflow protection devices
were not installed when the side sewer was first built. The District also finds, however, that
failing to install a overflow protection device may pose a serious risk to the health, safety and
property of the District, its residents and businesses; hence, if a property owner or long term
leaseholder chooses not to install a overflow protection device the property owner or long
term leaseholder should bear all liability arising from sewage overflow or flooding caused by
the failure to install such an overflow protection 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 or long term leaseholder to install a
overflow protection device.
B. Permissible Exceptions to Requirement for Overflow Protection Devices;
Waiver and Assumption of Liability. A property owner or long term leaseholder otherwise
required to have installed and maintained an overflow protection device pursuant to this
Chapter, for a building which has been previously connected to the District's sewer system
without a properly installed overflow protection device may apply for an exception to the
requirements herein for installation and maintenance of such an overflow protection device.
If a property owner or long term leaseholder applies for an exception pursuant to this
Subsection, the exception may be either granted or denied by the District. If the exception is
granted, an agreement for an exception will be recorded with the Contra Costa County
Recorder's Office wherein the property owner or long term leaseholder expressly assumes
the risk of all damage related to any sewage overflow or flooding of the subject property that
such an overflow protection device on the side sewer may have prevented or mitigated had
an overflow protection device had been properly designed, installed and maintained.
C. Procedure for Obtaining Exception. A property owner or long term leaseholder who
applies for an exception shall obtain and fill out an application on a form acceptable to the
District. The application shall fully describe the technical, cost and /or aesthetic reasons why
installation of such an overflow protection device is not possible, practical or preferred. The
District shall review the application and grant or deny the application. If the exception is
granted, the property owner or long term leaseholder 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 on the property for which the exception is
requested. Once executed, the waiver and assumption of risk shall be recorded with the
Contra Costa Recorder's Office so as to become part of the subject property's chain of title.
The exception may be terminated at any time and installation of an overflow protection device
required when, in the discretion of District, modifications to the property or other
circumstances render installation of such an overflow protection device to be reasonably
practical. (Ord. 226 § 3, 2003)
Chapter 9.15
• ..
•
.. • ••
OVERFLOW PROTECTION
9.08. 040 ,espe n s 4: Azrrt�f- b- aeI-Ew teic eve ic f:1 e isr -e yent ire n
Pe'ai e-e s .
9.15.010 Overflow protection devices.
A. Findinas. The District finds that overflow protection devices are
necessary to minimize the volume of sewaae overflows and flooding of public and
private premises, protect the health and safety of the District, its residents and visitors
and the environment and to minimize damaae to District and private property. Proper
installation and maintenance of overflow protection devices by property owners and
Iona term leaseholders of residential. industrial and commercial properties constitute an
integral part of the private and public sewage collection system designed to convey
sewage from buildings throuahout the District to the treatment plant. Failure of property
owners and 12na term leaseholders to properly install and maintain overflow protection
devices can prevent the proper functioning of the sewage collection system as
desi ne .
B. Mandatory Installation and Maintenance. All property owners an I n
term leaseholders shall install and maintain a baskwateFoverflow prtivegtk�nprotection
device on any side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to, the District
seweFsystem IR this node the term ""bake ater oyeF flow Preye Is sewer system.
This requirement applies to all such persons._ regardless of whether they acquired the
serviced property before or after the date of formal adoption of this Chapter. In this
Code, the term "overflow protection device" includes both baGkwateFoverflow rote i n
devices and backwater check valves and shutoff systems, and any other devices the
District may approve from time to time for such purposes. All backwateF overflow
preYeRtien2Mjqgfig=n devices shall serercomply with the
spesifisa#+ and shall be maintained so as
to provide for their continuing function as designed.
A—.1. New Side Sewer Installations -er} 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
baGkwater-overflow pfevewtieeprotection device of the type and in the manner
prescribed in the Standard Specifications and
the permit requirements as - Fegt++}included in Title 5 of this GodeCode. except as
provided for in Section 9.08.041. 9.15.020.
9-2. Maintenance Requirements. All baskwateF- overflow preventienprotection
devices shall GeFnpeFt with the DiStFirt standaM sperifiratieRs and be maintained so as
to provide for their continuing function as designed. All baGkwateFoverflow
pfeYeetienR[g1ection 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 overflow protection devices.
G-.-3.Elevation and Sizing Requirements. All baGkwateFoverflow
pFeueetiee ro ection devices shall be installed at an elevation and of a size that protects
the property from damage. It is the property owner's or Iona term leaseholder's
responsibility to either confirm that the baslcwateF- overflow pFeventieFF Zro Aection device
is at the proper elevation and size, or to obtain competent assistance from a licensed
plumber or contractor to confirm its proper elevation and size. If any subsequent
modification of the property results in the baskwateFOVerflow pFeyentienprotection
device being undersized or at an improper elevation, the property owner or Iona term
leaseholder shall adjust or replace the baskwateFoverflow pFeveRtiGAa tection device
to the proper elevation and /or size. Should it be determined that pFepeFty dama- i
damage.
4)-.-C. Failure to Follow the Overflow Protection Device Requirements.
Any property owner or longterm leaseholder whose property has no baskwateFoverflow
rotec ion device, or has a defective or improperly installed baskwateror
maintained overflowprotection device, shall be responsible for all damage that results
from the lack of such aan overflow protection device, or the failure of thea defective or
improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device to prevent such damage.
Should it be determined that property damage is sustained as the result of overflow
protection device located at an improper elevation, the property owner or Iona term
leaseholder shall be responsible for any such damage. (Ord. 226 § 2, 2003: Ord. 198 §
3(Exh. C(part)), 1996)
9.15.020 Limited exceptions to
requirement for baekwate-r—overflow
protection devices.
safety Of DiStFiGt FeSideRts and te minimize the possibility of damage to pFopeFty. The
O+strar.#- alssA. Findinas Reaardina Exception Requests. The District finds that
some property owners or Iona term leaseholders may prefer to apply for an exception to
the requirements herein for ' installation of a overflow
preventianprotection device, or that it may be imprartiGahle for relent. rP-sid -enne6 where
baskwateFparticularly onerous technically, financially or aesthetically for some
properties where overflow pFeventkm4a[otection devices were not installed when the
reside;oeside sewer was first built. The District also finds. however,
that failing to install a baskwateFoverflow pFeven.. pro a tion device may pose a
serious risk to the health, safety and property of the District is residents and
businesses; hence, if a property owner or Iona term leaseholder chooses not to install a
baskwateFOVerflow pFeYentieR Drotection device the property owner or Iona term
leaseholder should bear all liability arising from sewage overflow or bask- flooding
caused by the failure to install such aan overflow protection 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 or Iona term
leaseholder to install a baGkwateFoverflow pfeveetierg r ection device.
-X.-B. Permissible Exceptions to Requirement for BaGkwater Overflow
DreyentieRerotection Devices; Waiver and Assumption of Liability. A property owner
whe+sor Iona term leaseholder otherwise required to install a baGkwate have install d
and maintained an overflow ^r°�,�,�n r e ti n device
9.08. 040 to this Chaster, for a building which has been previously connected to
the Districts sewer system without a properly installed overflow protection device may
apply for an exception to the requirements herein for installation and
maintenance of such an overflow protection device.
If a property owner or Iona term leaseholder applies for an}an exception
pursuant to this subseetieriSubsection, the exception w+llmav be either granted or
denied by the District. If the exception is granted, an agreement for an exception will be
recorded with the Contra Costa County Recorder's Office wherein the property owner or
Iona term leaseholder expressly assumes the risk of all damage related to any sewage
overflow or bask- flooding of the subject si^',:eF r e that
ef-such aan overflow protection device on the side sewer will be FeGerde d with the
may have prevented or
mitiaated had an overflow protection device had been properly designed installed and
maintained.
C. B Procedure for Obtaining Exception. A property owner armor Iona term
leaseholder who applies for an exception shall obtain and fill out an application fer
devise -on a form acceptable to the District. The application shall fully-describe dead
the technical, cost-,pfastwa4 and /or aesthetic reasons why installation of such aan
overflow protection device is not possible} practical or preferred. The District shall
review the application and grant or deny the application. If the exception is granted, the
property owner or Iona term leaseholder 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 ffefor all overflows +n}p� the property for
which the exception is requested. Once executed, the waiver and assumption of risk
shall be recorded with the Contra Costa Recorder's Office so as to become part of the
PFGPeFtY'6 Ghain of li subiect property's chain of title. The exception may be
terminated at any time and installation of an overflow protection device required when,
in the discretion of District modifications to the property or other circumstances render
installation of such an overflow protection device to be reasonably practical (Ord. 226 §
3, 2003)
Item 8.a.1
OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES
What should the District require?
May 15, 2008
CCCSD Board Meeting
D OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICE ACTIVITY
Ration at certain houses suggested by inspectors.
?cifications require OPD for certain elevation
ins.
hroom" device patented by District.
de requires OPD's for certain elevation conditions.
ad on District permits.
:d on District maps.
Is OPD's in problem areas
�cifications call for OPD's on all new and repaired
:ions.
Je requires OPD's on all new and repaired
:ions.
Je requires OPD's on all connections and makes
i owners responsible for any damages resulting from a
overflow, if an OPD not installed.
utreach effort conducted.
1
00 �dGkWc��?r' frI�VGIIs
Viva not
I Barkyy�ler
L.J. ,� I ,1�IK r�ossltfj
M)IB &Vw frsl
l'�F [......... u5( ta
Uniform Plumbing Code requires only if drain in
structure lower than rim of nearest upstream manhole.
OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICE SURVEY ITEM
RESPONSES
Total # of Responders
40(100%)
Responders with no OPD requirement
13(33%)
Responders with OPD requirement
27(67%)
Of 27 responders with OPD requirement
-
Required for all new /repaired sewers
(regardless of elevation)
14(35%)
Required based on elevation only
13(33%)
Required based on previous overflow
(Union SD, Napa SD, Pacifica, Burlingame)
4(10%)
Required at point of sale
(Albany, Burlingame, Richmond, West County SD, Stege SD)
5(13%)
Retroactive for all properties
(Richmond, Marin Cty SD #5, Ora Loma SD, Tamalpais CSD, West Cty
SD)
5(13%)
Property owner responsible for all damages if no OPD
(San Mateo Cty, Marin Cty DS #5)
2(5%)
RAI
What is the value of requiring retroactive
installation of OPD's on all properties?
• Determine average annual property losses due
to overflows
• Estimate number of homes without OPDs
• Estimate installation cost of OPD's
• Estimate theoretical payback
3
AVERAGE ANNUAL PROPERTY LOSSES DUE TO
OVERFLOW CLAIMS
FISCAL YEAR
TOTAL OVERFLOW CLAIM
LOSSES
2006 -07
$ 19,912.
2005 -06
$ 66,526.
2004 -05
$138,018.
2003 -04
$586,578.
2002 -03
$ 92,862.
2001 -02
$265,336.
2000 -01
$151,542.
Seven Year Average
$188,728.
ESTIMATE NUMBER OF CONNECTIONS
W/O OPD'S AND COST TO INSTALL
• Total 1960 Connections - 68,000
• % Repaired /Replaced - 50%
• Remaining Connections w/o OPD's 34,000
• Cost of Installation Ranges
- 80% @ $250
- 10% @ $500
- 5% @ $750
- 3% @ $1000
- 2% @ $5000
• Total Cost of Installation for 34,000 properties
approximately $14 million
• Total Cost of Installation if 25% of properties meet
elevation criteria approximately $3.5 million
El
COST BENEFIT CALCULATION FOR OPD
INSTALLATION
• Save $190,000 per year in damage claims
• If retrofit all properties at $14 million _ $190,000
= 74 year payback
• If retrofit 25% of properties at $3.5 million
$190,000 = 18 year payback
• Cost to individual property owners (rate payers)
is relatively high given potential payback to the
District... is cost justified?
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES
PARTICULARLY DIFFICULT TO
RETROFIT
• Typical "mushroom" device has limited
capacity.... may not protect high water users from
blockages in their own lateral
• Commercial properties, in areas such as
downtown Walnut Creek, cannot be retrofitted
without digging up sidewalks and putting in
below grade valve box installation of "popper'
type devices
• Commercial /industrial properties not typically
located in low area that could be subject to
elevation criteria for mandating OPD's
5
Types of Overflow Protection Devices
OPD POLICY ALTERNATIVES
1. No OPD Requirement.
2. OPD required only where elevation criteria apply for new
construction.
3. OPD required for all new construction.
4. OPD required only where elevation criteria apply for new
construction and repairs.
5. OPD required for all new construction and repairs.
6. OPD required only where elevation criteria apply for new
construction and repairs and on point of sale.
7. OPD required for all new construction and repairs and on point of
sale.
8. OPD required retroactively for all properties where elevation
criteria apply or where an overflow has occurred and for all new
construction and repairs going forward.
9. OPD required retroactively and going forward for all properties.
BASIC FINDINGS OF OPD RESEARCH
• Retrofitting of all properties with OPD's has a
payback of over 70 years....this is not reasonable.
• Retrofitting of commercial properties is particularly
difficult or impossible, depending on their location.
• The public sewer main can only overflow into a
property if a property drain is located lower then the
nearest upstream manhole.
• For other elevation situations, the District does not
benefit from requiring an OPD
STRAW MAN RECOMMENDATION TO
START DISCUSSION
OPD required for.....
• All new construction
• All sewer repairs
• All properties where an overflow has or does
occur (retroactive)
• All properties where drain lower than upstream
manhole (retroactive)
iA
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR OPD
RETROACTIVE INSTALLATIONS
• Multi -year implementation program
• Use GDI /District records to attempt to id properties at risk
• Review programs of other jurisdictions for funding options
• Send outreach piece and survey to at risk properties
inquiring about how program can be incentivised
— Grants program
— Loan program
— OPD giveaway
• Review programs of other jurisdictions for "hammer' options
if at risk property owner will not install
— Property owner responsible for all damages
— Lack of OPD recorded on title
• Develop menu of implementation options for Board
consideration
SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS
• Direct staff to simplify language District Code
update to require OPD's for all new and repaired
sewers and retroactively for all sewers meeting
certain elevation criteria and those where an
overflow has occurred.
• Note in Code that retroactive provision will begin
with extensive outreach and research effort and
that no timelines for compliance will be set until
outreach effort is complete.
• At some time in the future, modify the District
Code to set strict timetable for OPD compliance
with appropriate incentives and "hammer ".
Board Input ??
`3. a.z�
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
May 9, 2008
TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
FROM: JIM KELLY, GENERAL MANAGER DN��—
SUBJECT: BOARD TRANSPORTATION MATTERS
At the April 3, 2008 Board meeting, Member Hockett requested a review of Board
Member travel policy relating to transportation to and from airports be placed on a future
Board agenda. She also requested discussion of what criteria are applied in providing
transportation for Board Members to and from District meetings. President Lucey stated
that he would not support use of a limousine or airport town car for transport to and from
an airport. Staff indicated they would review current policy on these matters, survey the
practice of other agencies, and request District Counsel to frame the legal boundaries
for these matters. The memo from the District Counsel will be forwarded to the Board
under separate cover on Monday, May 12, 2008.
REVIEW OF CURRENT POLICY /PRACTICE
The current Travel and Expense Reimbursement Policy /Procedure was last updated', on
October 18, 2007, and addresses travel to and from airports in two places:
In the Responsibility Section:
4. While traveling on District business, it is the responsibility of the elected officials,
appointed officials and employees to use sound judgment to ensure reasonable
expenditure of District funds.
And in the Procedure section, under Item 2. Transportation:
C. Taxi and Other Local Transportation: The use of a taxi is authorized when mote
economical services are not available, or in cases when valid business reasons, such
as timing limitations, warrant use of such transportation. If available and practical,
public or courtesy limousine transportation to and from airports should be used.
Based on existing policy, the District's practice had been to define what is a reasonable
cost of travel to and from an airport to be the cost of driving a personal vehicle to and
from the airport and parking at the airport, or an alternative means of transport that has
a similar cost.
There is no District policy regarding transport of Board members. The District's practice
is for managers to transport Board members as reasonably required for the conduct of
District Business.
SURVEY OF THE PRACTICE OF OTHER AGENCIES
Staff conducted a limited survey of nearby agencies on these matters. As shown on the
attachment, most agencies did not have a specific policy on transport to and from the
airport, but did reimburse for a taxi or shuttle to the airport. No agency surveyed had,
policy on Board Member transportation.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
These are presented in a memorandum forwarded to the Board under separate cover.
DISCUSSION
The District's practice of approving reasonable costs for transport to and from airports
conforms to the District's existing travel policy and does not appear to be different from
the practices of nearby agencies.
As previously mentioned, transportation of Board Members to and from District
meetings is not covered by any existing District policy. Other agencies do not have
policies that address this matter.
If the Board desires to modify current policies and /or practices, or have staff develop'.
new policies for Board consideration, staff will follow the policy guidance the Board
provides.
2*016024)
QUESTIONS:
(1) Do you have a policy that addresses what may or may not be reimbursed
regarding travel to and from airports?
(2) Do you have a formal policy relating to transporting Board Members to
and from meetings?
RESPONSES:
City of Concord
(1) Not addressed specifically. Just reasonable cost.
(2) No formal policy re. picking up or dropping off Board Members. (When
one Councilmember was temporarily unable to drive, other
Councilmembers sometimes picked him up and dropped him off after
Council meetings).
City of Walnut Creek
(1) Receive $100 a month auto allowance for driving to meetings and
attending events
(2) No policy on picking up or dropping off Board Members.
DSRSD
(1) Not specified, but taxis to and from airport are reimbursed
(2) No policy on picking up or dropping off Board Members.
Union Sanitary District
(1) Reimbursed for taxi or shuttle to airport.
(2) No policy on driving Board Members to or from meetings
Delta Diablo
(1) Reimbursed for taxi or shuttle to airport
(2) No policy on driving Board Members to or from meetings
East Bay MUD — DID NOT RESPOND
Agenda Item 8.a.3)
Board Meeting of May 15, 2008
Written Announcements:
a) Advertisement of the Martinez Renovations (Phase 2), DP 5979
The Martinez Sewer Renovations Project (Phase 2) is part of the ongoing
Collection System Renovation Program. Multiple phases of sewer
renovations are expected in Martinez. This phase will focus on sewers
just west and south of downtown. The project will reconstruct
approximately 7,000 linear feet of 6- and 8 -inch sewer lines within public
right -of -way and easements. Both open -cut and horizontal directional
drilling methods will be used.
This project will be advertised on May 29 and June 2, 2008. Bids open on
Tuesday, June 17, 2008. The construction cost is currently estimated at
$1,940,000. The Board will be asked to approve the construction contract
at the July 3, 2008 Board Meeting.
b) Advertisement of Auxiliary Boiler Improvements Project, DP
7231
The Auxiliary Boiler Improvements Project, District Project 7231, will
replace the mechanical controls on the auxiliary boilers with new direct -
acting electronic controls The project consists of the addition of new
control systems that will improve the efficiency of the boilers and other
modifications to improve the safety and reliability of the boilers. This
project will advertise in June 2008 and bids will be opened in July 2008.
The construction cost is currently estimated at $250,000. The Board will
be asked to approve the construction contract at the August 7, 2008 Board
Meeting.
c) Advertisement of Lafayette Sewer Renovations (Phase 5), DP
5977
The Lafayette Sewer Renovation project will renovate and /or replace
approximately 11,000 linear feet of 6- and 8 -inch sewer within the public
right -of -way and easements. Pipebursting will predominately be utilized
as the method of installation for the sewers. Additionally, the project will
include open cut sewer main point repairs within the public right -of -way on
Saint Marys Road in Lafayette and Moraga Road in Moraga. Bids will
open on Tuesday, June 3, 2008. The construction cost for this project is
estimated at $1,980,000.
Based on numerous discussions with the East Bay Municipal Utility District
(EBMUD), the City of Lafayette, and the Town of Moraga, the District's
Contractor can not start work on the Saint Mary's site prior to August 25,
2008. EBMUD's project on Moraga Road is scheduled to be completed by
August 19, 2008.
Additionally, the District's Contractor will coordinate and combine our
traffic control efforts with the City of Lafayette's project - Saint Mary's
Road Slide Repair. The City of Lafayette's slide repair project is also
schedule to start on August 25, 2008. The District and the City of
Lafayette have planned the projects to avoid conflict with EBMUD's road
closures and to mitigate traffic impacts after the road is opened.
A public outreach meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday, May 13, 2008
at the Lafayette Community Center at 7:OOpm.
d) Bay Area Air Quality Management District Notices of Violations
Settlement
During the calendar years 2007 and 2008, the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) issued four Notices of Violations (NOV)
to the District. On April 11, 2008, the District received a settlement offer of
$5,000 from BAAQMD to resolve the NOVs. District staff and legal
counsel reviewed the settlement offer and determined that it was
acceptable. BAAQMD recognized that the District responded rapidly and
diligently to the incidents once they were discovered, and the fines were
attenuated accordingly. The BAAQMD settlement offer is valid for 30
days. Staff has sent a check for $5,000 to BAAQMD to finalize the
settlement.
e) Inspection of Repaired Vactor Truck Cab /Chassis
There was damage to the vactor truck cab /chassis during transport to the
Vactor Manufacturing facility. This hydrovac was approved with the 2007-
08 District Equipment Budget. The cab /chassis has been inspected by
District mechanic Nick Wright and the frame laser tested by a frame shop.
The result of the inspection and testing prove the cab /chassis to be sound
and a good foundation for our Vactor Hydrovac unit. The manufacturer,
Sterling Motors, has also agreed to extend the overall warranty on the
truck by one full year. Staff plans to notify the Vactor dealer, Ricker
Machinery, that we will accept the cab /chassis.
f) Acceptance of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District's 2006
Greenhouse Gas Emissions by the California Climate Action
Registry
On April 25, 2008, the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) notified
the District that they had reviewed our 2006 greenhouse gas emissions
inventory. CCAR further indicated that the District's emissions inventory
meets the standards for general reporting protocol. They entered our
emissions report into the CCAR database and granted the District the
status of Climate Action Leader. The District is permitted to display the
logo (shown below) identifying the District as a Climate Action Leader.
g) Mt. View Anniversary Event Reminder
As a reminder, Mt. View Sanitary District (MVSD) will hold a public open
house on Saturday, May 17, 2008 to commemorate their 85th anniversary.
The event is scheduled from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Since parking is limited,
parking will be provided at 1635 Pacheco Boulevard with shuttle buses
transporting attendees inside the plant gate.
h) ADA Training for District Staff
On May 20, 2008, the District will provide a two -hour ADA training
program for staff who have contact with the public. The program, "ADA
Sensitivity in the Workplace ", will provide information about strategies that
can be used to make our agency more welcoming and better able to assist
customers with disabilities. It also meets the requirements of the ADA
Self- Evaluation and Transition Plan, which the Board adopted in 2006.
i) CSO Facility Improvements Study Session
On Wednesday, May 7, 2008, District staff and project consultants
attended the Walnut Creek Design Review Commission for a study
session on the Use Permit for the Collection System Operations (CSO)
Facility Improvements. In order to educate the Commission about the
function of our CSO facility, staff created a one -page handout which is
included as an attachment. The facility design concept was very well
received. The Commission complimented the architecture and the
creative use of the constrained site.
Their questions centered on the appearance of the facility from
Springbrook Road. They are interested in adding more diversity in
landscaping such as adding some decorative columns to the fencing and
appropriate signage to note the circulation pattern, i.e. entrance and exit,
from the multiple driveways. They also had some minor suggestions on
changes to the parking layout and driveway circulation.
Staff will be working to evaluate and incorporate some of their suggestions
prior to the next Design Review meeting scheduled for June 4, 2008. At
that meeting, the Design Review Commission is expected to recommend
that the project go forward to the Planning Commission for approval of the
Conditional Use Permit.
One member of the public, Mr. Primo Facchini, asked to speak. He
supports the project and reminded the Commission that the District is an
Independent California Special District which is funded by the taxpayers.
As such, each member of the Commission is a District ratepayer. He also
stated that Commission should be aware that they are spending
ratepayers' money and their own money if they impose any requirements
that would significantly increase the cost of the project. In speaking to Mr.
Facchini after the meeting, he indicated that he is a Trustee of a local
Cemetery District and feels strongly that the public does not understand
the services that Special Districts provide.
j) Property Taxes Update from California Association of
Sanitation Agencies (CASA)
CASA Lobbyist Mike Dillon provided an update via letter on the property
tax issue on May 8, 2008. He urges agencies to continue writing to their
legislator, expressing concerns about the impact the loss of property taxes
would have on agency operations. Refer to the attached letter for more
detailed information on this issue.
k) Attendance At The National Association Of Clean Water
Agencies 2008 Summer Conference And 38 th Annual Meeting
The National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) 2008
Summer Conference and 38th Annual Meeting will be held in Anchorage,
Alaska, from July 15 through July 18, 2008. The theme of the conference
is "The future of Clean Water is Now! - - How Next Generation Issues are
Impacting Utilities Today." The conference includes the awards ceremony
for the Peak Performance Awards. During the ceremony, the District will
receive a Platinum 10 Award for ten years of full regulatory compliance.
Director of Plant Operations Doug Craig and Plant Operations Division
Manager Randy Grieb will utilize their Management Profession Expense
Reimbursement to attend the conference and receive the Platinum Award.
Laboratory Superintendent Bhupinder Dhaliwal will also attend the
conference and receive the Platinum Award. Bhupinder's attendance is
included in next year's Travel & Training Budget for Plant Operations.
Agenda Item 8.a.3)
Board Meeting of May 15, 2008
Additional Written Announcements:
1) Announcement of Public Meeting and Public Bidding of
Martinez Sewer Renovations (Phase 2), DP 5979
District Project 5979, Martinez Sewer Renovations (Phase 2), is part of the
ongoing Collection System Renovation Program. Multiple phases of
sewer renovations are expected in Martinez but this phase will focus on
sewers just west and south of downtown. The project will reconstruct
approximately 7,000 linear feet of 6- and 8 -inch sewer lines within public
right -of -way and easements. Both open -cut and horizontal directional
drilling methods will be used.
A public outreach meeting was held on Thursday, May 8, 2008 at Martinez
City Hall. Twenty -two homeowners were in attendance and the meeting
was well received by all attendees. This project will be advertised on May
29 and June 2, 2008. The bids will be opened on June 17, 2008. The
construction cost is currently estimated at $1,940,000. More information
will be presented when the Board is asked to approve the construction
contract on July 3, 2008.
m) Martinez LAFCO Meeting on May 14, 2008 on SOI
At its May 14, 2008 meeting, Contra Costa LAFCO ordered completion of
District Annexation (DA) 166. No one attended a protest hearing on the
proposal earlier in the week. DA 166 is an approximately 88 acre
annexation of nine parcels in Lafayette, Martinez, and Orinda.
LAFCO also continued its discussion of expanding central county service
agencies' Spheres of Influence out to the Urban Limit Line and directed its
staff to put together a plan to collect contributions from agencies to pay for
an environmental report. While both the District and the Contra Costa
Water District submitted letters to LAFCO explaining why they did not
want to pay for such an environmental study, LAFCO requested that
representatives of each agency appear at its June 11, 2008 meeting to
discuss the matter further. District staff will attend that meeting and
reiterate our position that it is not in the best interest of our ratepayers to
fund CEQA for this expansion of our Sphere Of Influence.
n) Announcement of Lafayette Sewer Renovation Public Meeting
District Project 5977, Lafayette Sewer Renovations (Phase 5), is part of
the ongoing Collection System Renovation Program. This project will
reconstruct approximately 11,000 linear feet of 6- and 8 -inch sewer lines
within public right -of -way and easements utilizing pipe bursting.
A public outreach meeting was held on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 at the
Lafayette Community Center. Twenty -six homeowners were in
attendance and the project details were well received by all attendees.
Bids for this project will be opened on June 17, 2008. The construction
cost is currently estimated at $1,980,000. More information will be
presented when the Board is asked to consider approval of the
construction contract on June 19, 2008.
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District's collection system consists of more
than 1,600 miles of underground pipelines (over 300 miles in Walnut
Creek alone), ranging in size from 6 inches to 8.5 feet, and 19 sewage
pumping stations. To ensure constant flow through our pipelines, our
Collection System Operation employees perform critical maintenance
work, such as:
• Television inspection of sewer pipelines: A small video camera on wheels is
sent through the pipeline to locate problems.
• Hydroflushing: A high - pressure water system is used to clean out pipelines that
are clogged with grease or other debris.
• Rodding: A high - powered auger is used to remove roots from the sewers.
• Construction: Repair or replacement of small sections of sewer pipelines;
everything from hand tools to heavy equipment is used.
-AML
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary Dh4lct
Collection System Operations Facilities
Improvements Project Factsheet
Who We Are
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) provides wastewater collection and
treatment for approximately 465,000 residents in central Contra Costa County.
About our Walnut Creek Facility
Our Collection System Operations (CSO) Facility, located at 1950 Springbrook Road,
provides an essential public service by housing our sewer maintenance operations,
which includes our sewer cleaning and pipeline repair staff and equipment.
Purpose of our CSO Facility
Our CSO Facility:
• Houses a staff of 60 personnel and service vehicles needed to provide sewer
cleaning/maintenance and to conduct small sewer repair and replacement projects;
• Functions as the District's alternate emergency response center;
• Includes a warehouse, to stock sewer repair and cleaning supplies, and a vehicle
repair shop to maintain our vehicles and equipment.
Strategic Location of our CSO Facility
Our CSO Facility is located at the center of our service area and allows us to provide
the quickest response — especially to Walnut Creek overflows, sewer repair and
cleaning needs.
About Our Current Facility
• Constructed in 1956 as our headquarters office building
• Undersized for current staff and equipment needs
• Severe shortage of shower and locker facilities
• Not designed for current equipment technology
Green Vision for Our CSO Facilities Improvements Project
Our existing facility at 1950 Springbrook
Road
We are carefully designing our new proposed Facility to incorporate as many "green"
features as feasible and we are designing the building to achieve LEED certification.
The current planning vision for our new facility
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of
SANITATION AGENCIES
215 K Street, Suite 2290, Sacramento, CA 95814 PH: (916) 446 -0388 — FX: (916) 231 -2141 www.casaweb.org
May 8, 2008
TO: CASA Member Agencies
CASA Executive Board
CASA Legislative Committee
CASA Associates
CASA Attorneys
CC: Catherine Smith, CASA Executive Director
FROM: Mike Dillon, CASA Lobbyist
RE: PROPERTY TAXES STILL AT RISK
Via Electronic Mail
Yesterday the Assembly Budget Subcommittee #4 on State Administration heard the
Department of Corrections budget and was expected to take up the so- called "parole
realignment proposal," which proposes to use water and wastewater property taxes as part of
the funding mechanism. However, at the end of a two and one -half hour hearing on general
program operations of the Department, Committee Chair, Assemblyman Juan Arambula merely
stated: "The other issues (meaning the property tax realignment, etc.) have already been aired
and we will address them again at a later time."
In the meantime, on Monday, Elizabeth Hill, the state's Legislative Analyst, sent a letter to
Senator Denise Ducheny, the Senate Budget Committee Chair, suggesting additional options
for use of the property tax under the LAO parole realignment proposal. As I mentioned at the
CASA Conference, a constitutional issue has been raised about using local property taxes to
pay for a state mandated program; in this case, parole realignment. To get around this
concern, as well as opposition to the partial loss of Proposition 172 sales taxes that currently
goes for city law enforcement, the LAO has suggested several new alternatives. The funding
mechanism to support the parole realignment would instead rely on vehicle license fees (VLF)
that currently go to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) (approximately $363 million), as
well as cities (approximately $149 million). The reduction in DMV funding would be offset by a
$9.00 vehicle license fee increase and the cities loss "could be partially offset by property taxes
shifted from water and waste districts."
More significantly, however, the LAO continues to go after all water and wastewater agencies'
property taxes. Once again, the LAO points to "the legislature's direction to enterprise special
districts in 1978 to end their reliance upon property taxes and begin shifting to user fees."
Ensuring Clean Water For California
To: CASA Members
Date: May 8, 2008
Page 2
Under an "optional element," the LAO suggests that the legislature change state law to specify
that water and wastewater districts no longer receive property taxes for enterprise functions
The LAO notes that this change would be permitted under Proposition 1A.
Under this scenario, the LAO recommends the "legislature give cities and counties the
authority, flexibility, and responsibility to determine how these revenues are allocated to best
meet the needs and preferences of their local communities. Under this optional element, each
county board of supervisors would hold a public hearing within 6 months to determine whether
these property taxes would be:
• Allocated to cities and / or the county for general purposes. This would allow (1) cities to
offset their VLF revenue reductions and/or (2) counties to supplement their parole
realignment or other program resources.
• Allocated to the county to allow it to contract with enterprise special districts to provide
services. This could allow water and waste districts to continue receiving all tax funds they
currently receive.
• Eliminated, with taxpayers offered commensurate property tax rate reductions. This option
would serve as the default in case cities and counties did not reach an agreement
regarding the allocation of water and waste district property taxes.
Following the public discussion, supervisors would enact an ordinance specifying the allocation
of the property tax. To ensure that the board's decisions regarding the allocation of property
taxes have broad support throughout the county, the ordinance would become effective only
upon the approval by the city councils of the cities representing at least one -half of the cities in
the county and at least fifty percent of the population living in the incorporated area."
The LAO's new recommendation has not been publicly vetted yet. In the meantime, the
Governor will be releasing his May Revision of the Budget on May 14th, which will provide new
revenue estimates and recommendations to the legislature for addressing the mounting Budget
deficit. If the LAO proposal were to gain traction, it would still require a two- thirds vote of the
legislature. Please continue writing to your legislators, expressing concerns about the impact
the loss of property taxes would have on your agency's operations.
Ensuring Clean Water For California
9 ��' T)
2008 -2009
Sewer Service Charge Procedure
• Current Ordinance adopted in 2007 with mailed Proposition 218 notice.
• Rate for 2007 -2008 set at $300 per residential unit.
• Maximum rate for 2008 -2009 set at $313 per residential unit.
• If Board seeks to impose a rate less than $313 for 2008 -2009, Board must
adopt a resolution, by majority vote of Board, setting a lower rate.
• If no resolution fixing rate at less than $313 is adopted, rate will be $313
for 2008 -2009.
• Separate hearing and decision required to place charges on the tax role.
A majority vote is required after the hearing.
1097277.1
0)
=
O
O
D
O
LO
T
O
d
�
O
�
LM
�
as
�
m
O
N
i�
~
00
OO
a�
13
ao
0
0
M�
4ma
o
—
o
T
cz
a
CLs
Lo
o
�Lm
rml
p
O
O
O
O
LO
T
O
p
//W
VJ
co
};
�
m
O
N
i�
Cl)
CD
u)
Q
U
OO
qa► .�
ao
p
o
C-
N
-
CT
o
—
T
cz
^
u ,
Lo
0
0
1�
1�
U
cz
C
i
a�
a�
-0
CD
N
N
_R)
Q
0
>N
06
N
U)
Y
U
cu
cu
Z
i
N
2
O
O
O
n
O
o
L� o
O > o
a
3
cz Q) h�
iU) cz -0 a) CoO =3 � cn -0
�0070�0 >*
N
V
O
4-0 �.v'�o�a)cnEo
O Q0
� N �Q��O�.O�- O�
�� Q
CD -0 070
� N — > E -� � 0O CZ
C � ZCZ00QO�
.OV =0�= O O 0
V •� -
C O (1))
._
O a. .LO CZQ-. (D— CL0°�c�
V��(n4��EEU�E
O 0czocz oo 00m
O O � O
L U C�� U��— U� Q.+.r 070
o
o
0
o.
o
3
o
o
o
m
M�� 0
4)
rm
cz
V
L
n 1
f^W
�^W`■
o
QL
O
cn
cz
cz
E^
U
cz
cz
E
cz
O
.O
Q
Q
>
-0
cn
v
^ `
C:
N
o
0
N
.cz
0
C
CL
O
O
O
U
�
O
O
cz
D
E
C:
cz
c
cz
E
U
O
CZ
CD
CZ
C
O
•V
C:
-C:
N
O
U
gL
CZ
4-0
E
0
V
o
w
>
C
IT
U
N
cz
cz
O
U)
�
c
•�
U
E
E
O
�
L
U
am
o
o
0
o.
o
3
o
o
o
m
M�� 0
4)
rm
cz
V
L
n 1
f^W
o
cz
cz
U
�
E
cz
.O
Q
(n
-0
cn
c:
C:
N
o
N
.cz
0
U
CL
O
O
O
U
�
.�
'0
cz
Q
CD
CL
U
O
CZ
CD
CZ
i
O
O
-0
,CD
CL
o
o
0
o.
o
3
o
o
o
m
M�� 0
4)
rm
U
O
U cz
C ^>'
CQ
CZ
W
O �
.0 O � O Z p N O
CE O `
:0 L .i
O O �
.p . i
U =3 O
'(D o � 4-0 .� (z
N U O
O �•
M .. (D _
W
cZ 0) C
OCZ
+r C;) O >. cz
O _
_ U OC � c� � o
■ O L L ♦.+
�.{ ..P Q) cz
CV C/) Q C: V C: cn cn
c � 7C3 O a)
O Q.
C O E
x
a W a m aai cz 0
O
L
i
i
E
.O
O
U
L
O
O
cz
a)
L
cn
cn
a)
cz
U
a)
O
w
cn
a)
D
°
a
O
O
I� 0
�- w
w
C/)
cz
W
L
U
'c O
CZ
CZ ch
P C:
CZ Q
O
c U
CZ CZ
E c
cn cz O
cz
cz U �
=
Q
. O
cz X
Q
c: E
/J �
O
V U
w o
o
0
O
V
3
0
�{ e
o
n
A.{
QD
W
cz
O
O
CL
w
■
w
C
CL
Q
W
C
c
W
=3
.O
4-0
�✓
(Z
C:
O
N
(n
r
CZ
z:
CZ
W
'.
"a
N
O
cN �
U
=
O
Q
Q
C
C:
O
CZ
O
O
CZ
O
cn
�
a=
U
U
cn
i
CZ
O
�
.�
N
Ov
=
co
O
O
o
0
°'
0
o
�0W=
CZ
X
0
0
cz
_O
N
EC
N
CZ
0
O
am
(z
m
(z
i
N
O
U
O
�
L
U
a
w
C/)
cz
W
L
U
'c O
CZ
CZ ch
P C:
CZ Q
O
c U
CZ CZ
E c
cn cz O
cz
cz U �
=
Q
. O
cz X
Q
c: E
/J �
O
V U
w o
o
0
O
V
3
0
�{ e
o
n
o
> o
O
�o
}j
..
c
3
0
�
i
O
�-
70
d
"
O
0
a
�_
c
_cz
�
�
O
N
p
N
0
O
cz
4-0
cz
_
cn
CZ
cz
-+
a)
�-
a)
c:
E
V
E
-E
(D
0
co
3:
cz
O
■ •
`V
U
w
CZ
0
CZ
cn
p
. .
in
�
.—
�
to
—
.�
c:
-2
>
O
N
-0
E
cz
0
-';z
u)
c:
70
cz
cz
cz
0
CZ
70
Cy)
-C
CO
cz
W
cz
0
O
L
am
0
cn }+
.0 ` °'
N
U O C 4,
(D E CL �� >
W- Q O CL
-� co O
i CZ
Q� U Cn C/) Cn
(n E
�-
n i `
CL
� O O > O
cz > � O
CL > •L_ Cz Q
� ° U � 0 0
0)(-) O ._
Cz CZ — O cr
U U
O
V C)
*. cz > CZ C:
^ U 0 C 0 �cz
O z E E E O
p
Z o -1 -0
Q
om O = U
LM
a
a�
CL
0
CL
o
o
0
� a
0
� 3
a
vt
�-w
CD
}'
0
Q •> U
O j L •�
} CZ ^'
•� . a) O > CZ cn
�-- U C Q Q C: _ L
O � C Q Q
o C: cD E -
CD
E
a) �o C: 0
cn a� a� -Y �-
° E O)o � �_
C: O 00 i Q) U U
0 0
O
+r >+ N
U
U N N Q >
C }, C)- :3 O •
N
C: C N O i
0 0� cz 0•O �0 CL 0
O
Cl.
■ � O cn � cz CL >O cz E
mij o ° =�-O� o
-0 U •� � .� U V �
0 4-0 = C) � �, •� � � a)
J 0 U cCS
0 -�
um
a .
•� O
O
O
G
O
3
a
o
e
o
4?
`� O
O
O
a
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
Type of Action: BUDGET REVIEW
No.: 9.a. Budget and Finance
Subject: RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
Submitted By:
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller
Initiating Dept./Div.:
Administrative /Finance & Accounting
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION:
D. Ratcl VT M/graves K. Alm James M. elly,
General MAnager
ISSUE: The fiscal year (FY) 2008 -2009 Operations & Maintenance (O &M) Budget and
Debt Service Fund Budget are being submitted for review at the May 15, 2008, Board
Meeting, and are scheduled for approval at the June 5, 2008 Board Meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Review the FY 2008 -2009 O &M Budget and Debt Service Fund
Budget and provide District staff with comments and guidance leading to the public
hearing and approval of the Budgets at the June 5, 2008, Board Meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The FY 2008 -2009 O &M Budget was prepared using an
assumed $11 rate increase in the Sewer Service Charge (SSC) which will generate
approximately $1.85 million. The total rate increases from $300 to $311 per residential
Unit Equivalent (RUE) and is allocated as follows: $260 to the O &M Fund (O &M) and
$51 to the Sewer Construction Fund (Capital). The O &M Budget results in a decrease
of $1.5 million to O &M reserves. Property tax is currently used for Debt Service and
Sewer Construction. If the District were not to receive property tax, the SSC rate would
need to increase by approximately $74 /RUE to equal the lost property tax revenue
(using FY 2008 -09 Budget)
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: At the Board Workshop in January, different
SSC rate scenarios were considered that impact District revenues as well as the fiscal
year -end reserve balances. The assumptions used in developing this year's budget
reflect a SSC rate increase of $11. The Board could choose not to implement a SSC
rate increase for FY 2008 -2009. Also, the Board could choose the option of not making
N: \ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 1 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
Subject. RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
a payment towards the unfunded liability associated with GASB 45 post retirement
benefits. Finally, the Board could choose an alternative that was not presented at the
January, 2008, Board Financial Planning and Policy Workshop, up to $13 per year
which was stated in the Proposition 218 Public Notice sent to ratepayers last year.
BACKGROUND: Staff has developed a ten -year financial plan for forecasting
revenues, expenses and fund balance. The model assists the Board and staff in
addressing SSC rates for future years. Staff made a presentation at the January 31,
2008, Board Workshop recommending an $11 increase for FY 2008 -2009. Also, at the
Board Workshop, issues were presented that may affect future years including capital
cost trends, the increasing cost of benefits and utilities, regulatory exposures and the
potential need for bond financing, and change in significant liabilities.
The FY 2008 -2009 proposed budget includes the allocation of $5.2 million from the
O &M Fund towards the unfunded liability associated GASB 45 post retirement benefits.
The $5.2 million annual liability was actuarially determined and includes an approximate
payment of $2.5 million for retiree medical, dental and life insurance premiums annually
with the difference of $2.7 million to remain in a GASB 45 investment vehicle, pending
Board approval.
In May, 2007, the District ratepayers received a Proposition 218 notice indicating a two -
year rate increase of up to $13 a year for each fiscal year. In May of this year, a Notice
of Public Hearing was published to notify ratepayers that on June 5, 2008, a public
hearing is scheduled to receive public comments on the Sewer Service Charge rates to
be imposed for Fiscal year 2008 -2009.
In FY 2004 -2005, a new Debt Service Fund was created showing a separate fund for
debt service to help clarify and simplify budget presentations. Attachment
summarizes the Debt Service Fund Budget.
The O &M portion of this position paper focuses on variances between projected FY
2007 -2008 expenses and the proposed FY 2008 -2009 Budget. The position paper also
notes any significant variances between the budgets. Attachment II summarizes the
O &M revenues, expenses, and reserve balances for seven years FY 2002 -2003
N :\ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 2 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
Subject. RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
through FY 2008 -2009 (five years of actual expenses plus FY 2007 -2008 projected and
FY 2008 -2009 proposed budget numbers).
O &M Revenue: The attached draft budget includes a budget assumption for SSC of
$311 per RUE based on an $11 increase. The O &M SSC allocation increases from
$242 to $260; the SSC allocation to the Sewer Construction Fund decreases from $58
to $51. This increased allocation as well as anticipated new connections results in an
increase to O &M SSC revenue of $3,391,200 compared to projected FY 2007 -2008.
The following table compares Projected FY 2007 -2008 to Budget FY 2008 -2009 O &M
Revenue:
Total District O &M revenue for FY 2007 -2008 is projected to be $52,620,827 compared
to the FY 2008 -2009 budget amount of $57,031,422. The resulting increase of
$4,410,595 or 8.4% is mainly due to increasing the SSC rate and the allocation of more
revenue to the Running Expense Fund (O &M). We also anticipate increased City of
Concord revenue for increased shared facility costs and modest increases in all other
revenue accounts combined.
O &M Expense: Total District O &M expenses are projected to be $55,595,362 in FY
2007 -2008 compared to a O &M budget of $58,495,861 in FY 2008 -2009. This reflects
a $2,900,499 or 5.2% increase in expenses.
N: \ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- OB.DOC Page 3 of 8
Projected
Budget
Increase
Variance
Variance
O &M REVENUE
2007 -2008
2008 -2009
1
%
Sewer Service Charge
$ 40,232,500
$ 43,623,700
3,391,200
8.4%
City of Concord
8,565,000
9,555,000
990,000
11.6%
All Other
3,823,327
3,852,722
29,395
0.8%
Total
$ 52,620,827
$ 57,031,422
4,410,595
8.4%
Total District O &M revenue for FY 2007 -2008 is projected to be $52,620,827 compared
to the FY 2008 -2009 budget amount of $57,031,422. The resulting increase of
$4,410,595 or 8.4% is mainly due to increasing the SSC rate and the allocation of more
revenue to the Running Expense Fund (O &M). We also anticipate increased City of
Concord revenue for increased shared facility costs and modest increases in all other
revenue accounts combined.
O &M Expense: Total District O &M expenses are projected to be $55,595,362 in FY
2007 -2008 compared to a O &M budget of $58,495,861 in FY 2008 -2009. This reflects
a $2,900,499 or 5.2% increase in expenses.
N: \ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- OB.DOC Page 3 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
The table below compares Projected FY 2007 -2008 to Budget FY 2008 -2009 O &M
Expense:
Utilities
Projected
Budget
Increase/Decrease ( -)
18.5%
Repairs & Maintenance
3,066,710
3,285,111-
Variance
O &M EXPENSES
2007 -2008
2008 -2009
Variance
%
Salaries
$ 20,859,651
22,255,048
1,395,397
6.7%
Benefits & Cap O/H Credit
16,241,165
15,775,891
(465,274)
-2.9%
Chemicals
1,470,000
1,676,000
206,000
14.0%
Utilities
5,573,060
6,604,200
1,031,140
18.5%
Repairs & Maintenance
3,066,710
3,285,111-
218,401.
7.1%
Hauling & Disposal
939,020
1,024,460
85,440
9.1%
Professional & Legal
458,920
599,540
140,620
30.6%
Outside Services
2,227,828
2,469,650
241,822
10.9%
Self- Insurance
1,600,000
850,000
(750,000)
-46.9%
Materials & Supplies
1,671,900
1,840,850
168,950
10.1%
All Other
1,487,108
2,115,111
628,003
42.2%
Total
$ 55,595,362
58,495,861
2,900,499
5.2%
O &M Salaries: District O &M salaries are projected to be $20,859,651 in FY 2007 -2008
compared to a budget of $22,255,048 in FY 2008 -2009 resulting in an increase of
$1,395,397 or 6.7 %. This increase is mainly due to the filling of several vacant
budgeted positions, the addition of new positions in the Staffing Plan, a 3.0% general
salary increase assumption for April 2008 and April 2009 combined, step (merit)
increases for newer or promoted employees within their salary ranges, offset by a 3%
salary vacancy factor totaling - $640,000.
N: \ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 4 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
Benefits Including Capitalized Administrative Overhead Credit: District O &M benefits
including the capitalized administrative overhead credit for FY 2007 -2008 are projected
to be $16,241,165 compared to a budget of $15,775,891 in FY 2008 -2009. This is a
favorable decrease of $465,274 or 2.9 %. The major factors contributing to this
decrease are discussed below:
Capitalized Administrative Overhead, which is the District overhead charged to
Capital Projects and credited back to O &M expense, is projected to be
- $2,838,935 in FY 2007 -2008 as compared to a FY 2008 -2009 Budget of
- $3,784,451, generating a decrease of $945,516 to O &M expenses. The
Administrative Overhead percentage was increased from 107% of capital
salaries in FY 2007 -2008 to 119% of capital salaries in FY 2008 -2009 Budget, as
outlined in the 10 -year plan document.
A 4% benefit vacancy factor of - $815,000 is used in FY 2008 -09, and accrued
compensated absence is projected to be $100,000 less in FY 2008 -09 due to a
one time auditor recommended entry to accrue earned and holiday compensated
time on the books in FY 2007 -08.
These $1.86 million in favorable variances are offset by:
• An average 1.2% retirement rate decrease applied to increased salaries,
resulting in a less than normal increased retirement contribution of $467,853 or
6% increase for FY 2008 -2009 when comparing to FY 2007 -2008 projected
actual expense.
The annual GASB 45 OPEB payment remains at $5.0 million FY 2007 -2008, and
increases to $5.2 million in FY 2008 -09. This payment includes a portion of each
year's retiree premiums totaling approximately $2.5 million for retiree medical,
dental and life insurance premiums in FY 2008 -09. Please note that the
individual line item called "OPEB Contribution" looks favorable, but this is only
because the retiree premiums increased, which lowered the remaining future
contribution.
N: \ACCOUNTING \GMTEMP1 \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 5 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
• Medical and Health Insurance costs are $768,786 higher in the FY 2008 -09
budget compared to projected FY 2007 -08. Active employees are $458,786
higher when comparing FY 2007 -2008 projected actual expense to the FY 2008-
2009 Budget. Health Net HMO /PPO rates increased by 21.7% and Kaiser rates
increased by 5% for FY 2008 -2009. Retiree medical increased by $310,000; the
average weighted increase of Health Net and Kaiser Retiree premiums was 8 %.
• Dental premiums increased by 12 %, but are locked -in two -year rates for FY
2008 -09 and 2009 -10. The total dollar increase from projected FY 2007 -08 to
Budget 2008 -09 is $98,214. Active employees are $54,214 higher; retirees are
$44,000 higher.
Chemicals: Chemical usage expense is projected to be $1,470,000 in FY 2007 -08
compared to a FY 2008 -2009 Budget of $1,676,000 for an increase of $206,000 or
14.0 %. This increase is due to cost increases for lime, hydrogen peroxide, boiler
chemicals, and odor and corrosion control chemicals for the Plant and Pumping
Stations.
Utilities: Utilities are projected to be $5,573,060 in FY 2007 -2008 compared to a
budget of $6,604,200 in FY 2008 -2009 for an increase of $1,031,140 or 18.5 %.
Electrical usage has been down in POD due to the high availability of the cogeneration
turbine. An extended landfill gas outage resulted in increased natural gas use in FY
2007 -2008. The natural gas price for FY 2007 -2008 has been under $9.00 per
decatherm. Currently, the natural gas price is above $11.00 per decatherm. Natural
gas for FY 2008 -2009 is budgeted at $9.55 per decatherm and we are waiting for a
buying opportunity. The high natural gas prices result in higher budgeted FY 2008-
2009 costs.
Repairs & Maintenance: Repairs and maintenance costs are projected to be
$3,066,710 in FY 2007 -2008 compared to a budget of $3,285,111 in FY 2008 -2009, for
an increase of $218,401 or 7.1 %. Projected FY 2007 -08 expenses were lower due to
sludge pumps budgeted to be repaired, but were replaced through a capital project in
FY 2007 -08. Also, budgeted maintenance for the laboratory information management
system was not required in FY 2007 -08.
N :\ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 6 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
Hauling & Disposal: Hauling & Disposal costs are projected to be $939,020 in FY 2007-
2008 compared to $1,024,460 in the FY 2008 -2009 Budget resulting in an increase of
$85,440 or 9.1 %. This budgeted increase for 2008 -09 is due to grit quantities being
lower than expected in FY 2007 -08 and less expensive ash reuse options became
available in FY 2007 -08. Funding one HHW mobile collection event and increasing
HHW disposal costs due to a new contract and greater volume in FY 2008 -09 also
contribute to the increase.
Professional & Legal: Professional and Legal costs are projected to be $458,920 in FY
2007 -08 compared to a FY 2008 -2009 Budget of $599,540 for an increase of $140,620,
or 30.6 %. This increase is due to increased FY 2008 -09 expenses for labor counsel.
Also, some legal and professional work was deferred from FY 2007 -08.
Outside Services: Outside Services are projected to be $2,227,828 in FY 2007 -08
compared to a FY 2008 -2009 Budget of $2,469,650 for an increase of $241,822 or
10.9 %. This increase is primarily due to higher FY 2008 -09 temporary staff costs, HR
recruitment cost and diversity outreach, County property tax administrative fee, and risk
management outside consulting costs. Also, increases are anticipated for assistance
with annexation mapping and legal descriptions, anticipated increase in other public
agency fees, and deferred spending from annexations anticipated in FY 2007 -08 are
now expected to be performed in FY 2008 -09.
Self- Insurance: The O &M contribution to the Self- Insurance Fund was $1,600,000 for
FY 2007 -2008 ($800,000 regular allocation and an additional $800,000 for an
unanticipated claim) and the Board is scheduled to approve the allocation of $850,000
to the Self- Insurance Fund for inclusion in the FY 2008 -2009 O &M Budget at the Board
Meeting of May 1, 2008.
Materials & Supplies: Materials & Supplies are projected to cost $1,671,900 compared
to a FY 2008 -2009 Budget of $1,840,850 for an increase of $168,950 or 10.1%. This
increase is primarily due to not purchasing as many UV lamps in FY 2007 -08 due to
new UV channels put into service. Older lamps will need replacement in FY 2008-
2009. The FY 2008 -09 Budget also assumes increases in fuel costs, operating
N :\ACCOUNTING \GMTEMPI \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 7 of 8
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: May 15, 2008
subject. RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
BUDGET; RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 DEBT SERVICE FUND
BUDGET
supplies, higher costs for a new HHW contract, and fuel surcharges for deliveries of
supplies.
All Other: All other expenses combined increased by $628,003 from projected FY
2007 -2008 to the FY 2008 -2009 Budget. This is primarily due to election expense in FY
2008 -09 of $320,000, increases for public information in FY 2008 -09 and underused
technical training and conferences in FY 2007 -08.
Any revisions to the FY 2008 -2009 O &M Budget determined at the May 15, 2008,
Board Meeting will be incorporated in the Budget submitted for approval at the June 5,
2008, Board Meeting, at which the following actions are scheduled for Board
consideration:
Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the FY 2008 -2009 O &M
Budget, Self- Insurance Fund Budget and Debt Service Fund Budget.
• Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the Sewer Service Charge
rates for FY 2008 -2009 and for the collection of the FY 2008 -2009 Sewer
Service Charge and prior year delinquent charges on the County Tax Rolls.
• Approve the FY 2008 -2009 O &M Budget, Self- Insurance Fund Budget and Debt
Service Fund Budget, and approve a resolution which establishes a SSC
increase of $11 for a total SSC of $311 for FY 2008 -09.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Review the FY 2008 -2009 O &M Budget and Debt
Service Fund Budget and provide District staff with comments and guidance leading to
the approval of the Budgets at the June 5, 2008, Board Meeting.
N: \ACCOUNTING \GMTEMP1 \BUDGET\2008 -2009 BUDGET\Budget Review O &M 2008 -2009 05- 15- 08.DOC Page 8 of 8
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
DEBT SERVICE FUND
2008 -2009 BUDGET
Debt Service Revenue:
Sewer Service Charge
Reserve Account Bond Interest Income
Ad Valorem Tax
Total Debt Service Revenue
Debt Service Expense:
1998 Bond Interest Payment and Amoritized Costs
2002 Bond Interest Payment and Amortized Costs
Recycled Water Loan Interest Payment
Total Interest Payment and Amoritization Costs
1998 Bond Principal Payment
2002 Bond Principal Payment
Recycled Water Loan Principal Payment
Total Principal Payments
Total Debt Service Interest, Amoritized Costs and Principal Payments
Fund Balance - Beg of Year
Revenue over Expense
Transfer from /(to) O &M or Capital
Fund Balance - End of Year
Attachment I
101,500
3,764,945
$ 3,866,445
$ 745,064
634,262
42,360
$ 1,421,686
$ 1,665,000
635,000
144,759
$ 2,444,759
$ 3,866,445
(n O
W O
> N
W co
O
W N
no
a0
N
c
W C
CL N
W NO
C6 O
LAI N
D cn
W Q
W >-
M J
24
0 N
OLL
OD
M
n
� �
N
M M M (7
O
O O N N
O O N N
(D n 0) 00
19t M M
M
N O co
0j M O
Co L
O �� (�
n 0 0 0 00
T N (O
N ,a
M N
M
N C
0 y
n O n"
L( N Lf O Ln OD
Ili
N O N
0
N Im
'a
M LO N r
N T O r- L!j
't
CM It M
n
OD
N M LO M
(A LO 00 O
N n co O ql LT
00 N n 00 r- 'T
(D
It
O (D N
n It M
(D to
r aD
O m
cM O) M r-
M M OD M N 00
r
(D T Ln
Cl) (0 N
N
LO
T N LO
n
co n
0
Q
(O c-o
ti N Lo M
co
M r O CO
LO
(n O
W O
> N
W co
O
W N
no
a0
N
c
W C
CL N
W NO
C6 O
LAI N
D cn
W Q
W >-
M J
24
0 N
OLL
OD
O O N
n
� �
N
w
0000
000('OOC7
M
N M O o
�
p d
O O O
O �� (�
n 0 0 0 00
(D
N ,a
o o r<
� � 0ri z L6 co
r,
N LO 0
�
00 Lo (o
rnOrnrn
(3) O co (Z) (3 <t
*-N Lo 00
N N N
N N
(n
p
m
L7
N
oiN�
N N
N
OM
�OpNNLO
N
LO
le
(V)
(O
co
O
cn N
(D
O
O
O
� N
O N
N
AD CZ
co U
N U)
:tl t
CL
co '0
U O
C c
co C
O O
-0 CL
7 E
5 U
O
C Q
O
-a U
a)
co m
O CD _� O
,O- 00
CO = O
C 75 O
a) E N
Q
X N a)
N t' C-
CD c +.
7 c
c O
co O O
a) CO ca
C •O ca
W
0
ca 0 U)
rn ° cn
C CV
(o
a)
aN ca
0— U
CD c
O
ca
a) T
a) c to
c > Co
CL o°[ o
w ca ate)
Z Q W
--
cn
a)
0
z
U)
X
c
m
E
t
Q
rn
O
O
N
00
O
0
N
Q
E
N
aT
O O N
n
O 00 O O LO
N
Ln
n Ln
N
N M O o
�
C
O O N
N
n 0 0 0 00
(D
M
le M
N LO 0
�
L) O M
oc
(O
M
L7
N
N N
O
N LO M
O
00 LO O 00 N
LO
le
N A
CO
(O
N y
Cl) (0 N
N
L() co � 00 CO
0)
n
co n
0
(O c-o
ti N Lo M
co
M r O CO
LO
0)
r- O
n
T rn
N
O00 M
5
C\(6
(O 00 N
N
M
N
O N
CO
co LO O M
n CO CO qtT +-
M
LD 00 n
T n O o
co r M
n
N O 0) co M
M
LO
O Ln
�
N M
(O N co
LO
N N It M N
O
N It
r-
LO o
N 3
n M N
M
N N M 00 O)
(O
N
O N
n
..
LO It CO
CO
� n M M O)
OO
N
O N
O
(D L
0 V
O O 00
O
r- "t O N
O
O
n O
n
r N
Q
M
N
M
T
O
L(') m
r-
dt Ln 00 r
*-
It
It
m
N
M
r N
LO
r
T N n
(D LO M L7) � n
O
LO O LO
M O T
0
r ,- (D
�
LO qe L!') LO M
It
O
O O
O
N CO c
O 6
n O r
O)
Ln Ln N N Ll)
r
00
It M
N
Ct n
r CO N
(O
LO 00 O
O
(O
M (0
O
N
L
00 00 (O
N
N O 00 LO (O
M
(O
OO
co
M N�
r q ( 00 T
LO
M
00 00
n
r n
N
n M
M
C
O O O O N
u
N
O N
M
LO
CO O O O
O) co O) 00 It O
O
Lo O Lo
lqT co M
O O
O N M
co
d
N N
C R
OD O O
M
O O Cl! T (O
Cl
�-
CO
co
CO
CO
V
ONO r-
LO
CO r CO CEO M
0)
M
M�
N (O M
N
cD M n O
N
O
00
r T
Na
M M
N
m Lo (O 00 N
NN
O
O
M
O N (fl n
M 00 LO LO co n
O
LO O LO
00 � O Ln
O O LC)
LO
00 n 00 co O
00
N
N r-
It
N (D M
00
00 w M
00
co n N N 00
r-
O
O
LO
O
Ln O N
r-
n Ln O M M
O
r
O r
LO o
N *�
M O T
m
N CO n T (D
N
M
O M
M
LO It
M V
Cl (C M
M
a! a! r O CO
'It
O
O O
O)
r L70
O Q
M co M't
O LO CO n T
N
T
M -0
N
M
Ict
T T
T
M N T 01
O CO T N
LO
O LO Lc)
O
M
CO LO M
r
00 T L() n (D
M
N
Ln N
n
N N r
00
O E M
co
n 00 d O n
00
O
LO m
�t
cc
N
LC) r Ln
r
r- �pl: O O
M
r-
N n(
Ly V
co N M
O M N
N
Ll7
n M O M'IT
rl. L!7 LZ7 M Ln
0)
CO
N
OD
r- N
T Oct
O
O
L() M
T c0
0 Q
M (O M-
OD W LO CO r
CO
N
w N
O
N
V3,
Efl
K3
b9
d)-
y>
c
7
.r
O
a) E
N
(D
�= N
N
c a)
°
CD
c o
O U
-
°
w
°w
03
r
i
LT i a)
Co Co U
.i a)
a)
� a) }
cr
a) U
!? cn
O
c
C c °
Q) >
(D
chi)
O
N c
a) C
ern(
03 Lii
X
[D
c
O° 0
(D
a) w
U U w m
c
O
>, }
rn to 0 W
O
v O(D
U U ()
O
.0 C O ( N
(n
c fn c
'� '� (a
//O� /O\
VJ \/ �
N m o Q- l0) Z
a)
ca a) ca
0) (D a) E
V O •Q
cn cn cn
D O L
°
c a
'� c O
c
>
m c m
>
°
3 >, -C
CD :=
E E F-
-° o t�
(D
m �
m a) a) c
3 3 3
•-
cn00
c S
QwUrLrZ
m
c c
:3
0 0
LL
can)
co
O
cn N
(D
O
O
O
� N
O N
N
AD CZ
co U
N U)
:tl t
CL
co '0
U O
C c
co C
O O
-0 CL
7 E
5 U
O
C Q
O
-a U
a)
co m
O CD _� O
,O- 00
CO = O
C 75 O
a) E N
Q
X N a)
N t' C-
CD c +.
7 c
c O
co O O
a) CO ca
C •O ca
W
0
ca 0 U)
rn ° cn
C CV
(o
a)
aN ca
0— U
CD c
O
ca
a) T
a) c to
c > Co
CL o°[ o
w ca ate)
Z Q W
--
cn
a)
0
z
U)
X
c
m
E
t
Q
rn
O
O
N
00
O
0
N
Q
E
N
aT
q OL
2008 -2009 O &M BUDGET
ASSUMPTIONS
REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS:
Sewer Service Charge - $311
$260 Allocated to O &M
$51 Allocated to Sewer Construction
Total Budgeted Ad Valorem Tax $12.4 million:
$3.8 Million Allocated to Debt Service Fund
$8.6 Million Allocated to Sewer Construction Fund
EXPENSE ASSUMPTIONS:
$5.2 Million allocation for GASB 45 post retirement benefits
Retirement Expense -1.2% decrease in rate
Increases to Healthcare costs for active employees:
➢ Healthnet - 21.7%
➢ Kaiser - 5 %
Increases to Healthcare costs for retirees - 8% Weighted Average
Administrative Overhead percentage- increased from 107% to 119%
(Of Capitalized Salary)
Vacancy Factors:
3% for Salaries
4% for Benefits
N: \ADMINSUP\ADMIN\RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc
TOTAL DISTRICT REVENUE & EXPENSE
2008 - 2009 BUDGET
(000 Omitted)
Revenues
Expenses
Revenues Over Expenses
Total District
$95,295
$97,35
LS2.0591
N: \ADMINSUP\ADMIN \RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc
Operations &
Maintenance
$57,031
$58,49
14 5
° "`Sewer
Construction
$38,264
$38,858
94
OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE
2007 -2008 BUDGET COMPARED TO 2008 -2009 BUDGET
(000 Omitted)
2007 -2008 2008 -2009
Budget Budget
Revenues $52,998 $57,031
Expenses 55,227 58,496
Revenues Over Expenses 2 229 1 4
Fund Balance 06/30/09 $5,329
Sewer Service Charge Rate
$242 $260
(O &M Portion Only)
Total Sewer Service Charge $300 $311
N: \ADMINSUP \ADMIN \RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc
Increase
(Decrease)
7.60
5.9%
H
D
Z
V/
H
V
H
Z
V
J
Z
W
V
W
D
m
W
V
Z
Q
Z
W
_Z
Q
D
Z
U)
Z
O
H
W
CL
m
O
O
N
O
0
O
N
LL
W
Z
W
m
Z
V)
W_
Q
y
F-
V
H
_N
G
i
a
to
tv
t
w
L
M
a
m
N
h
to
to
O
H
'c
C13
'O
N
a
tv
U
tV
7
C
O
C
N
tV
O
0
.r
m
c
to
m
p
a
a
t
U
U
f0
N
0
0
O
N
Rs
m
�
o
w'
ao
�
-•
t
cc
R O
coo
to
to
^
tc
'C O >
>
v
N
N
a0
O
LL C
Of .+
of
O
O
N
0
ci
O
r
'
co
It
N
Z
o0
tw
c
coo to
CD
CY) N
N
o�
0
O
O
m
O
en
N
co
ti
V
N
t"'f
ap
W
3
t7p
N
t`
O
O
to
t70
ty
r
N
0
N
�
^ v
Goo
o
3
^
N
a7
N
m d a
O
at
O
o
N
O
o
M
O
O
v
c i
a)
a
a
Uf
In
tc
.=
o
eV
0
t°n
Z
s O
C O >
O
N
v
to
O
d
to
ti
tf>
Z
R r
LL
W
F-
Z
Q
07
O w
m
N
O
O
ti
O
r
O
N
M
m
It
N
Go
O
O
0
to
in
q
p
U)
p m
r
„
O
Go
N
O
Z
N
N
N
M
O^
co
O w
M
O
0
In
co
r
O
^
l j
co
N
N
t.
O
Go
d
co
O
to
`'
A
m
N
M
t.
t0
p
N
O
O O
t70
r
M
N
N
N m
N
. r
M
tc
M
y
O d
o
o>
o
O
�
co
o
O
�
M-
a
N
of
0Of
'
al
1`0 0
O >
N
N
M
v
v
r
*'
O
m %1-0
v
N
LL
V
m
o
^
CO
O 0
N
O
co
T'
Of
Q
'
r
C
tN -0
00
N
0)
co
O
V-
N
J
0 7
O
r
0
N
o0
co
Q
F-
O m
N
�'
N
N
N
t0
O
~
O
O
O
M
co
O
O
O
O d
h
r
co
�-
O
N
N ZA
r'
�
�
O
r
^
th
O
j
C m
Ln
c-f
to
p
.~~..
N
N
-
N
v
O
tce
Q
c c
W
to
>-
H
U
>
_Z
>
co
°Q
g
W
Z
w
Q
Z
c
a
U)
y O
t i
m
co
v
O-
i
a
to
tv
t
w
L
M
a
m
N
h
to
to
O
H
'c
C13
'O
N
a
tv
U
tV
7
C
O
C
N
tV
O
0
.r
m
c
to
m
p
a
a
t
U
U
f0
N
0
0
O
N
Rs
KEY LABOR COSTS - O &M
(000 Omitted)
Salaries & Wages
Salary Vacancy Factor
Retirement
Medical Insurance
Dental Insurance
Workers' Compensation
Benefit Vacancy Factor
Capitalized Adm.
Overhead
All Other
Total Labor Costs
2007 -2008
2008 -2009
Increase
Budget
Budget
(Decrease)
$21,725
$22,895
$1,170
(616)
(640)
(24)
7,982
8,268
286
5,184
5,844
660
655
743
88
494
362
(132)
(773)
(815)
(42)
(3,207)
(3,784)
(577)
5,008
5,158
150
6 452
3 031
1 579
N: \ADMINSUP\ADMIN \RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc
KEY INCREASES 2007 -2008 BUDGET
TO 2008 -2009 BUDGET
(000 Omitted)
N^ ,ADMINSUP\ADMIN \RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc
Dollar Increase
(Decrease)
% Increase
2007 -2008 Budget
$55,227
Salaries (Includes 3% vacancy
1,146
5.4%
factor)
Benefits (Includes 4% vacancy
432
2.8
factor)
Chemicals
286
20.6
Utilities
653
11.0
Repairs & Maintenance
(80)
(2.4)
Hauling & Disposal
2
.2
Professional & Legal
83
16.0
Outside Services
179
7.8
Self Insurance
50
6.3
Materials & Supplies
44
2.5
All Other
474
28.9
2008 -2009 Budget
$58,496
5.9%
N^ ,ADMINSUP\ADMIN \RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc
DEBT SERVICE FUND
2008 -2009 BUDGET
(000 Omitted)
Revenue
Debt Service
$3,866
Interest Expense 1,422
Principal Payments 2,445
TOTAL $3,867
N: \ADMINSUP\ADMIN \RATCLIFF\Budget Overheads 2008- 2009.doc