Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-08-25 i COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ' t � AREA CODE 714 540-2910 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA �+t` 9 6 2-2 41 1 P. O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 10844 ELLI5 AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP, 5AN DIEGO FREEWAY) August 21, 1970 TO: 14EW3ERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5 Gentlemen: Purusant to adjournment of the regular meeting held August 12, 1_970, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 will meet in an adjourned regular meeting: NOW Tuesday, August 25, 1970 at 4: 30 p.m. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California c eta y Note : The Executive Committee will meet at 5 : 30 p .m. following the District, No. 5 meeting. MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County Sanitation Districts P. O. Box 517510844 Ellis Avenue of Orange County, California Fountain Valley, CaliF., 92708 Telephones: 5 Area Code 714 540-2910 DISTRICT NO. - 962-2411 IIAugust 25 1970 - 4: 30 p.m. The following is an explanation of items appearing on the enclosed agenda, which are not otherwise self-explanatory. No. 6 - Annexation Policy - On July 14th, the staff was directed to draft an annexation policy for consideration by the Board. Since there are several complicating factors concerning the development of a standard annexation policy, the staff desires further direction from the Board in an effort to avoid possible time-consuming effort which would be wasted. Included with the agenda is a memorandum concerning the Districts ' investment in facilities which are equal to $310 per acre. In addition to the memorandum, we have enclosed copies of annexation policies adopted by Districts Nos. 2 and 7• At the suggestion of Chairman Parsons we have asked the General Manager of the Irvine Ranch Water District to advise us as to the charges to date which have been imposed on the properties adjacent to District No. 5 which may be annexed to our District in the near future. It is hoped that this information will be received by meeting time. After review of the available information, the Board may wish to re-direct the staff concerning the development of an annexation policy for the District. No. 7 - Amendment to Agreement with the City of Newport Beach for Collecting District Connection Charges . - The enclosed letter from the City of Newport Beach requests that the District Board consider amending the existing agreement between the District and the City for the collection of the District' s sewer connection charges. It appears that the current fees paid to the City by the District are not equitable and that an adjustment must be made. The City has suggested several alternate methods of revising the agreement and our staff recommends that the Board approve Alternate E which provides : Alternate "E" Combination of fixed fee and "fixture units. The City would receive $4.00 for each single family detachea residential unit. Assuming that each average residential unit contains twenty fixture units, the City coU'A"', SaMs2ffl'ot" Districts P.0. Box 5175 of Orange County, California 108L,14 Fibs Avenue Fountain Valley, CaliF., 92703 DO I RA"_ I Adjourned Regular Meeting August 25, 1970 - 4: 30 P.m. (1) Roll Call 3z Appointment of Secretary pro tem Staff report re: annexation policy for the District. See pages "A" 11B't and ITC11 Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from City of Newport Beach dated M _ � ; r -� August 20, 1970, requesting an wiend-,i--nt to the agreement for collection of sewer connection charges; and directing the General Counsel to e n prepare an amended agreement incorporating the provisions of Alternate "E" and providing for formal renegotiations at the end. of two years . See page "D" Staff report on discussions with Irvine Company relative to amending terms of loan agreement repayment provisions Consideration of request from The Irvine Company relative to relocation and reconstruction of existing, trunk sewer in Bay-side Drive : a. Consideration of motion to receive and file p4- letter from The Irvine Corapany dated August 19, 1970, relative to relocation of Bayside Trunk Sewer between Marine Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway., see page "E" ( Verbal report of Engineer regarding this 9 matter; and, c. Consideration of motion directing the General Counsel to prepare a Sewer Relocation Agreement between the District., the City of Newport Beach arid. The Irvine Company. S, (11) Adjoijrnriient COUNTY SANITAI-IoiV UIS-1-RIC-I S of ORANGE COUNTY,CAL!,OfN:11 P.O.BOX 5175 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA, 92708 (714) 540-2910 August 14, l•JA f 0 (714) 962-241411 MEMORANDUM TO: Fred A. Harper, General Manager. FROM: Paul G. Brown, Assistant General Manager SUBJECT: Acreage Annexation Fee for District No. 5 The 1,65 Financing Report for. the District prepared by Bartle Wells Associates recoriiiended an annexation fee computed on the District 's net investment in facilities and equity in joint works per acre tirhich, at that time, ,-ras approximately 250. The report also r.ecomi-,letided that this figure be re-computed each time an annexation is proposed. As you know, no policy was adopted at that time and one an).iexation (No. 3) took place without payment of any fees . Hoti•:ever, at that time, the Board records show that the Directors stated that they did not intend to establish a precedent thereby. ... As of June 30, 1970, the District 's net investment in facil_,_ties and joint worms is $35 97,215. Its bonded debt and outstanding capital obligations total $1,045,707, leaving a net worth of $2,651., 508. The present area in the District is ,5J9 acres . Consequently, the net investment per acre no:•r amounts to $310. The Bartle Wells formula still appears to be valid and it seems appropriate that the Board should- adopt a policy much along the sa-1'1e lines as Districts Nos . 2 and 7 with an annexation fee for 1970•-71 established at $310 per acre. Rather than escalate this figure based . on a construction cost index, I believe it should be recomm.end.ed that it be re--co;iiputed annually and that the resolution establishing the policy should so provide. Agenda Ttei,i y 6 -A- District 5 RESOLUTION NO. 69-17-2 ESTABLISHING MNEXAT-TON POLICY ARESOLUTION OF TIEE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. OF ORANGE COUNTY, ESTABLISHING FEES AND PIiOCr;DUhES CONCERNING ANNEXATIONS OF TERRITORY TO THE. DISTRICT WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to establish certain requirements for territory seeking annexation to this District:. NOV, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1_ That the proponents of any application for annexation of any territory to the District shall, as a condition . to securing approval of the Directors of the District to such annexation, comply with the followi.nc: Yequi.re���ents: - 1 . Payment of all costs incur•reci in processing the annexation . P. Payrnent to the Di-strict of the. sum of $250.00 per acre of territory so annexed . F,egit�ni.n- January 1 , 1.970, and annually thereafter, this fee is to be increased to reflect the Federal Water. Pollution Control. AdminIstrati.on Sewer Construction Cos Index for the Los Angeles i ctropolitan Area or $1.0.00 per acre , whichever is greaten-, unless post- poned by resolution of th:; Board . 3. That. annexed territory be subject to the teri-ris and conditions of all ordinances p ;r•taininc; to fees for connection to the District ' s faci.litics . 1� . The annexed territory shall be annexed into an appronr. iatc scvieri ng agency for t.hn pur•posc of Agenda Item #6 B-1 District 5 maintaining and operating the local sewer system including pumping stations and force mains. 5. The local sewerage system serving the annexation area shall be installed and connected to the District ' s system without expense to the District. 6. The territory, upon annexation, shall .be subject to all ad valorem taxes required for the retirement of the existing and future bonds of the District. Section 2._ That the procedures for annexations of territory to the District shall be as set forth on Schedule "A" attached hereto and made a part of this resolution, and the District ' s staff is hereby directed to give to the proponents of any proposed annexation a copy of Schedule "A" outlining the procedures to be followed; and, Section 3 . That the staff be directed to transmit to the Local Agency Formation Commission a certified copy of this . resolution; and, ... Section 11 . That the provisions of this resolution shall apply to any annexation of territory to the District initiated on or after March 12,' 1969; and,- Section 5. That all other resolutions or motions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed and made of no further effect. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on March 12, 1J69. Agenda Item #6 B- 2 District . PROCEDURE AND FEES FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT PROCEDURE: , I.. All requests for annexation MUST be in writing and directed to the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No . 2 of Orange County. 2. Such written request MUST contain the following: (a) The true and correct and complete legal description and map of the territory for which annexation is requested. TAX BILL DESCRIPTIONS AND ASSESS1,11ENT NUMBFRS ARE NOT ADEQUATE. ' (b) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of every owner within said territory and a designation of the portion or the interest oi•aned by each person. (c) The assessed value of each separate parcel_ of land within the territory having a. separate assessment, as shot<n on the last preceding equalized assessment roll of. Orange County.• (d) The total number of voters, if any, residing in the territory proposed for annexation. (e) Said written request must request the District to annex said territory. 3. Fees to be paid; when and how : (a) When written request is filed, it must be accorripan_i.ed by a CASHIER ' S CBECK payable to County Sanitation District No . 2 of Orange County in the sure of $325 .00. Should these processing costs exceed the $325. 00 fee, applicants will be requested to deposit the amount of such excess with the District. NO PART of this charge is refundable under any circumstances . (b) The forutal petition for annexation is prepared by the District and mailed to applicant for signature with a letter of: in- struction and a statement of the additional fees . When the applicant signs and 'rettzrr:s the formal petition for annexation, it must be accompanied by A CASHU.'.R I S Ci}ECK equal to a fee of $250. 00 per acre for each acre to be annexed. This fee is refundable if the annexation fails . hOT : All moneys paid to the District must be by cash, cashier 's check, postal_ or bank money order or certified chock . NO PERSONAL CHEMS WILL 13E, ACCEPTED. The ab9ve fees are subject to change . The fee schedul in effect at the tulle of actual payment of any fee is the one applicable . 11 . It is the policy of the: W.str1-ct not to accept for annexation tlr,y i.rrcgulaxly Shaped territory whj} ch conr;!.sts of sul-div-i-sions or proposed subdi.vir;i.on,; 1,-here i solatecl parcels of property 02' l.oi:s are excluded from or arc not incluclocl L•;:i. -.11a.11 the t•crri.t:ory to be anncxc,d . 5. It is c :.sc nt•:i.;ll. to allow 60 d ,y;; from the time, forinr11 1lc t,a.[ :i.oil is :i.£,nc:d ar�u fc•c • arc. p,<<i.d . }:o ,it:itic;]y no a ;c of -,,c-tiier 11111,11 after date of het1)-11-It;. Adopted by the Board of D.i.r-ector,, M,-Irch 1 ?, 19C9 . Agenda Item #6 B-3 District 5 RESOLUTION NO. 68-88-7 ESTABLISHING ANNEXATION POLICY A RESOLUTIOr; OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY, ESTABLISHING FEES AND PROCEDURES CONCERNING C' ANNEXATIONS OF TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT WHEREAS, it is in the. public interest to establish certain requirements for territory seeking annexation to this District; - and, WHEREAS, Boyle Engineering, District ' s engineers, have previously submitted a written recommendation, dated July 25, 1968, reappraising he District ' s existing annexation-fee schedule and recommending that certain requirements be established as conditions to the annexation of territory to . the -District: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 . That the proponents of any application for annexation of any territory to the District shall,, as a condition to securing approval of the Directors of the District to such �,. . annexation, comply- with the followi.ncr: Requirements: . 1 . Payment of all costs incurred in processing the annexation. 2. Payment to the District of the. sum of $250.00 per acre of territory so annexed . Beginning January 'l, 1970, and annually thereafter, this fee is to be increased to reflect the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Sewer Construction Cost Index for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, or $10.00 per acre, whichever is greater, unless oosL- poned by resolution of the Board . 3. That annexed territory be subject to the terms and conditions of all. ordinances pertaining to fees , for connection to the District ' s facilities. • 11 . The annexed territory shall be annexed into an appropriate seworin arrency fof- the purpose of Agenda Item #6 C-1 District 5 maintaining and operating the local sewer system including pumping stations and force mains. 5. The local sewerage system serving the annexation area shall be installed and connected to the District'.s system without expense to the District. 6. The territory, upon annexation, shall be subject to all ad valorem taxes required for the retirement- of .the existing and future bonds of the District. Section 2. That the procedures for annexations of territory to the District shall be as set forth on Schedule "A" attached hereto and made a part of this resolution, and the District ' s staff is hereby directed to .give to the proponents of any proposed annexation a copy of Schedule "A" outlining the procedures to be fol lovi ed; and, Section 3. That the staff be directed to transmit to the Local Agency Formation Commission a certified copy of this resolution; and, Section IE. That the provisions of this resolution shall apply to any annexation of territory to the District initiated on or after October 9, 1968; and, Section 5. That all other resolutions or motions thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repelled and made of no further effect. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on October 9, 1,90068. Agenda Item #6 C- ? District 5 SCHEDULE "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 68-88-7 - Procedure: 1. All requests for annexation MUST be in writing and directed to the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No, 7 of Orange County. 2. Such written request MUST contain the following: (a). The true and correct and complete legal description of the territory for which annexation is requested. TAX BILL DESCRIPTIONS AND ASSESSPa;NT NUMBERS ARE NOT ADEQUATE. _ (b) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of every owner within said territory and a designation of the portion or the interest owned by each person. (c) The assessed value of each separate parcel of land within the territory having a separate assessment, as shown on the last preceding equalized assessment - roll of Orange County. (d) The total number of voters, if any, residing in the territory proposed for annexation. (e) Said written request must request the District to annex said territory, ' 3. - Fees to be paid; when and hoTu: (a) When written request is' filed, it must be accompanied +� by a CASHIER' S CHECK payable to- County Sanitation District No . 7 of Orange County in the Burn of $325 .00. Should these processing costs exceed the $325 .00 fee, applicants will be requested to deposit the amount of such excess with the District.. NO PART of this charge is refundable under any circuri`s'tances . (b) The formal petition for annexation is prepared by the District and mailed to applicant for signature with a letter of instructions and a statement of the additional fees . When the applicant signs and returns the formal. petition for annexation, it must 'be accompanied by a CASHIER' S CIIECK equal. to a fee of •$250. 00 per acre for each acre to be annexed: This fee is refundable if the annexation fail-s .* NOTE: All moneys paid to the District must be -by cash, cashier' s check, postal or bank money order or certified check. NO PERSONAI, CHECKS VI1:LL BE ACCEPTED, The above fees are subject to change . The fee schedule in effect at the time of actual payment of any fee is the one applicable . It . It is the policy of the Di-trict not to accept for annexation any irreCul-arty shlgped terrl.t:ory whiclf c:ons:i.,ts of subdivisions or prohos,ed where isolated Agenda- Item #6 C-3 District 5 parcels of property or lots are excluded from or are not included within the territory to be annexed. 5. It is essential to allow 60 days from the time formal petition is signed and submitted to the District and fees are paid. Positively no use of District sewer .lines until after date of hearing, Noe Agenda Item6 0-1t District 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA City Hall ft1kC�41F0 Rtl 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 673-2110 August 20, 1970 Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Post Office 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92708 SUBJECT: Request for Amendments to Agreement for Collection of Sewer Connection Charges - Sanitation District No. 5 Dear Mr. Harper: On July 13, 1970, Newport Beach City Manager Harvey L. Hurlburt wrote Mr. Lindsley Parsons, Chairman of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. S, indicating the desire of the City to amend the April 1, 1966 agreement by which the City serves as a fiscal agent for the collection of charges from property owners wishing to connect to the District's system. .� As a result of our meeting in your offices on Monday, August 17, it was agreed that I would provide Mr. J. Wayne Sylvester, District Direc- tor of Finance and Secretary, with examples of new construction in different areas of the city so that a comparison could be made of formulas by which the city could be reimbursed for its services. The city now receives four dollars ($4.00) from the District for each permit processed. Five alternate methods have been explored for reimbursing the City: Alternate "A" Fixed fee for each permit processed. The present fee is $4.00 per permit. If this formula were continued, a fee of at least $6.00 would be in order. Alternate "B" Fee as a percentage of total revenues collected for the District. This method is proposed by the City in the July 13 letter. It is probably the easiest formula to administer and would be responsive to changes in district connection charges. The formula comparison chart indicates charges at 3% and 5%. O Agenda Item #7 D-1 Distr:i-ct Mr. Fred A. Harper -2- August 20, 1970 ..� Alternate "C" Fixed fee for each "fixture unit" in thestructure. The City would receive 10� or 2S� for each fixture unit in a structure in the examples described. This formula would be the most complex to administer but would provide the most accurate picture of actual processing costs. Alternate 'TD" Combination formula with the City receiving $4.00 per dwelling unit for all residential construction and 10¢ or 2S¢ per "fixture unit" for all other types of construction. Alternate "E" Combination of fixed fee and "fixture units." The City would receive $4.00 for each single family detached residential unit. Assuming that each average residential unit contains twenty "fixture units," the City would receive $4.00 for each twenty units for all other types of construction including commercial buildings and all multiple residential buildings. COMPARISON STRUCTURES 1. Type:. 3-story commercial office Address: 359 San Miguel Drive .� Locality: Fashion Island Valuation: $315,000 Plumbing Permit Paid: $74.00 Sanitation District Fees: $560.00* Total Fixture Units: 80 2. Type: 177-unit apartment building Address: 900 San Joaquin Hills Road Locality: Park Newport Apartments Valuation: $3,085,740 Plumbing Permit: $1,990.10 District Fee: $191355 Total Fixture Units: 20765 *All comparison structures were approved using the pre-January 1970 Sanitation District fee schedule. AapnH@ Ttam J17 D-2 District 5 Mr. Fred A. Harper -3- August 20, 1970 3. Type: Duplex residential (apartment addition) Address: 321 Larkspur Locality: Corona del Mar Valuation: $20,000 Plumbing Permit: $21 District Fee: $145 Total Fixture Units: 30 4. Type: Single family residential Address: #9 Linda Isle Locality: Linda Isle Valuation: $70,000 Plumbing Permit:. $38 District Fee: $145 s Total Fixture Units: 5S 5. Type: 16-story office building Address: 620 Newport Center Drive Locality: Newport Center Valuation: $S,2S0,000 Plumbing Permit: $560.S0 District Fee: $7,73S.00 ..w Total Fixture Units: 11105 ADDITIONAL DATA REGARDING FORMULA 1. In assessing fees for municipal plumbing permits and in deter- mining the District connection fees for all commercial and multiple resi- dential construction, both the City and the District rely on the 1967 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, as prepared by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. The Equivalent Fixture Units Schedule is found at Table 10-1. 2. The City in determining municipal plumbing permit fees does not use "fixture units." Only the number of fixtures need be recorded for municipal purposes. 3. As evidence of the substantial work required to properly analyze plans for large and complex structures, the City charges a plan-check fee equal to one-fourth the required plumbing permit fee for all buildings containing over 180 fixture units. 4. Based on City and District concurrence on a formula, a new contract should be developed immediately. Such a contract could be executed by the Newport Beach City Council at its meeting of Monday, September 14. The new formula would apply to all building permits issued after the agreement is executed. .MOO, Agenda Item #7 D-3 District 5 Mr. Fred A. Harper -4- August 20, 1970 5. Regardless of the number of fixture units in a given structure, no processing fee shall be less than $4.00 for each permit. 6. The new contract should provide for formal renegotiation at the end of two years. We look forward to hearing from the District. Very truly yours, Philip F. Bettencourt Administrative Assistant to the City Manager PFB dm Attachment - Table I' Agenda Item #7 D-4 District 5 TABLE I STRUCTURE FORMULA COMPARISON c� ¢ A B C D E H #1 C+ 3-story commercial $6.00 3% = $16.80 10¢ = $ 8.00 Same $ 16.00 Fee $560.00 5% = $28.00 25� = $20.00 as "C" FU 80 #2 177-unit apartment $6.00 3% = $590.65 10¢ = $276.50 $708 $552.00 Fee $191,355 5% = $967.75 25¢ = $691.25 FU 2,765 t7 i #3 Apartment (addition) $6.00 3% = $4.25 10¢ = $3.00 $4.00 $6.00 Fee $14S S% = $7.25 25¢ = $7.50 FU 30 #4 t� Single family (new) $6.00 3% = $4.25 10¢ = $ 5.50 $4.00 $4.00 Fee $145 5% = $7.25 25¢ = $13.75 C FU 55 w #5 16-story commercial office $6.00 3% = $232.OS 10¢ = $111.50 Same $221.00 Fee $7,735 5% = $386.75 25� = $276.25 as "C" FU 1,10S {r; r � Builders of Torlorrow's Cities...Today August 19, 1970 County of Orange Sanitation District No. 5 P. 0. Box 5175 Fountain Valley, California 92708 Gentlemen: Discussing our meeting with you on August 11_, • 1970 , we would hereby like to formally request that you take joint action concerning approval of our proposed relocation and recon- struction of your existing 21" trunk sewer in Bayside Drive between Marine Avenue a_zd Pacific Coast Highway. It is not anticipated that the decision to commit the area easterly of the present District No. 5 boundary will be reached NNW in the immediate future. Consequently, we cannot say at this time if the 39" line as recommended, in accordance with Shuirman & Simpson' s letter dated April 22, 1970, will be ultimately required. If the District feels that the 39" line should be installed at this time and is also willing to finance the cost of upsizing, The Irvine Company would have no objection. It is our intention to prepare plans for the reconstruction of this line within a new alignment for Bayside Drive as shown on the Tentative Map, which has been previously delivered to your office. We would request that the existing 21." line within the existing Right-of-Way on Bayside Drive be left in service under the jurisdiction of yourselves or the City of Newport Beach as sewer main servicing the connections which presently exist along its length between the Balboa Yacht Basin and the point of reconnection of the new sewer. We will prepare the construction drawings for the new trunk sewer in accordance with the standard specifications and requirements of the District. These plans will be prepared and the subsequent construction of a similar 21" sewer will be made at no cost to the District. The Irvine Company•550 Newport Center Drive•Newport Beach.California 92660 (714)644.301 1 Agenda Item 7i9a E-1 District 5 V Page 2 The Irvine Company August .19, 1970 If you have any questions or need any further information in order to provide us with Board action of your approval of this proposed relocation, please call me. Sincerely, ij+ O u Robert L. Snyder Project Engineer RLS/lj cc: Raub, Bein, Frost & Assoc. Agenda Item f9a E--2 District 5 9 ! 76 eo -73 1It I JOa /93�� 1 ' I : C�' , 1 �- V�1 C�t��'t" ��liCf{'%"L+✓y� ////7 L 'I �A �O,�1 C C �� � � - ... I 70/7 1 �< <�v • ': ��-� 1 �3 6 2 St,1, `/0 0 00 0 o i i . _ . ► ._ .. .. 'I t 7 L C c c�.� ': �..�:(�',�/j C�it v o o,0�1 z G�o o v, o-�� . _ � _... I :� �/lwtc�-,•� /x ';n0 ro0 ? �7 3 Pa-� v►u_,� � , ' G �� � t ✓ i� ��.a� Q c9 d v � O 7 v/-/s- qF j / a 'e7,? 5�� o r � •� 0� ��c cam% -� ! ^o i / I !I f ; �' •✓ I it i !��. I ! I�� _'.. � -':y !! - I ; i; II ' 713/ Llr o OL J O)I I I ( 1 1 i ( II ; I 1 li 1 197 r o t I I { k i , II ! I ! ! 1 1 ! IRV UP WAHR EMU POST OFFICE BOX D. I NNEW IRVINE , CALIFORNIA 92664 August 20, 1070 Mr. Fred Harper, General Manager Orange County Sanitation Distracts of Oran-e County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California Re: Upper Harbor View Hills Annexation to the City of Newport Beach Gentlemen: The area proposed to be annexed to the City of Newport Beach known as Harbor View Hills Annexation - Phase 3 presently lies within the Irvine Ranch Water District and also within Im- provement District No. 1 (Sewer) of the District. This area was not included in the original Sanitation District No. 14 but was included in Improvement District No. 1 when Sanitation Dis- trict No. 14 was dissolved. A map showing the present District `� areas is enclosed for your information. Taxes have been assessed on the Improvement District since it' s formation as follows: 1966-67 0. 5264 land value only 1967-68 0. 5252 land value only 1968-69 0. 5357 land value only 1969-70 0. 7249 land value only 1970-71 0. 7249(Proposed) land value only Present assessed value of the area in question approxi- mates ($1,350.00) , or one thousand three hundred and fifty dollars per acre, land value only, and at the present tax rate this equals ($9.79) , or nine dollars and seventy-nine cents per acre. We do not have the prior assessed valuations readily available but un- doubtedly they were much lower before Harbor View Hills develop- ment started. We hope this supplies the information you desire, if we can be of further help please call. Very truly yours , William H. Eppinger i Genera]_ Manager Irvine Ranch Water District WHE: sgt Enclosures Meeting Date � Time 3 Q District No. Type of Meeting JOINT BOARDS DISTRICT 1 Culver Griset Herrin Arbiso Lewis Miller Coco ;Baum Hogard Porter .Berton Westra Allen Phillips Christie Root Clark Magnus DISTRICT 2 Davis Bousman Dutton _ Pebley Just _ Harper Finnell Gomez Christie Root Gibbs Clark Magnus Green Shipley Culver Griset Herrin Dutton Pebley Harvey Kanel Finnell Gomez Herrin Griset Herrin Griset Hirth Croul Sims Zuniga Hyde Kroesen Smith Hileman Just Harper Wedaa Machado McInnis Hirth Winn Schniepp McWhinney Allen Phillips Miller Coco Parsons DISTRICT 3 Porter Rogers Hirth Culver Shipley Coen Arbiso Lewis Sims Zuniga Baum Hogard Smith Hileman Berton Westra Wedaa Machado Christie Root Winn Schniepp Clark Magnus Hirstein Allen Davis Bousman Allen Phillips Dutton Pebley . . . . . . . Green Shipley Mitchell Harvey Kanel Boyd Goldberg Herrin Griset Hyde Kroesen Just Harper OTHERS McWh.inney Sims Zuniga Harper Allen Phillips Brown — Sylvester DISTRICT 5 Carlson ✓ Clarke _ Parsons Dunn Hirth Croul Finster Allen Z Phillips Galloway Hohener DISTRICT 6 Keith Lowry Porter Maddox McInnis. Hirth Martinson Allen Phillips Nisson Piersall DISTRICT 7 Sigler �— Stevens Miller Coco Tremblay Griset Herrin •.� Crabb Porter Rogers Hirth _ Smith Hileman Hirstein Allen DISTRICT 11 DISTRICT 8 Shipley Coen Gibbs Mitchell Allen Phi11i'�) Boyd Goldberg Allen Phillips 7/8/70 gc